On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:48:32 +0200 (MET DST), Jerome Grimbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fabrizio Diversi makes some magical things to make me read
} Just a thought about what a pity,( I am now in the lunch break...)
} one year later after sms/e sources new license, and for a lot of reason that I do not understand (!!) nothing was done on the Q40 side, not because missing of knowledge but for other reasons.
Insert Troll-feeder here-----> which other reasons ?
Well I think that this whole discussion is an overkill. We did it before but it may be useful to see things a little more removed from the heat now :-)
Many people (among these myself as I have many times stated here) do not believe that SMSQ/E's license is appropriate or really open.
However how people's convictions affect their personal behaviours is their own choice. I choose to "play ball" in the SMSQ/E because I think QLing is fun and because I understand that although I do not like the license as it stands, it's in the final analysis the author's choice to do whatever the hell he likes with his software. Similarily if one chooses to abstain of all development in a software that he thinks that offends his personal convictions that's his choice too and should be respected. I do not think that disliking non Free software is a mortal sin and like the opposite position on the matter that too has to be respected.
As revealed and by Geoff's long article publicised here a little while ago, rifts and factions are plaguing the QL community for a long time. We are at the same point now and in my opinion without any reason. Nobody is the same and in matters of principle humans can be in opposing ends of the spectrum (not ZX ;-) ) I do not think however that if we look beyond the last year's differences, we cannot find some common ground somewhere. Unfortunately the dispute everyone refers to and noone mentions by name (hehe among these you. -Ed.) escalated to more than difference of points of view and wherever things get heated logic common sense gets out the window.
In any case and to stop beating around the bush, I believe that Peter (and every Peter... it could be me, Nasta, Tony, Geoff or whoever else -names drawn out of the hat randomly) has every right to develop or NOT whatever he wants. As you cannot tell a parent what language to teach his child, similarily you cannot tell an author or developer what software it has to run. For example, who are we to ask Marcel to stop using SMSQ/E in QPC and start using say... Minerva? It's not logical to do so; what is logical is put a kind request and see how he takes it. If he likes it fine if he doesn't we have to shut up and move on!
To conclude my rambling, there are always two sides in a dispute. We like it or not everyone has made mistakes or overlooked something or in any case had some part in escalating the matter. It would be easy to dismiss any party in that rift, but it gets insanely difficult when all parties involved are comprised by so talented individuals.
In reality I believe that noone deep inside wanted a rift, but since it came we have to either deal with it and fix it or just leave it alone. Escalating something is to the expense of the platform in the end wouldn't you agree?
To come back to my personal opinion (and to contradict Fabrizio... sorry Fabrizio :-) I personally do not feel abandoned. The sources are there (for every major OS) to be adapted and used and if I like it I can change it (and learn a thing or two in the process).
Abandoned, I'd be if I requested help and I did not receive. To date I haven't seen anything to justify that from either the SMSQ/E "camp" or the Free Software "camp". Everytime I asked, I received :-) (Most of the time more than I expected).
My personal plans for SMSQ/E concern my (unfished yet) multilingual keyboard driver, greek language module (ready needs to be tested with the latest SMSQ/E), an independent driver for the Aurora for 16 colours and to help Daniele Terdina with adapting the SMSQ/E for the GC to his QemuLator according to his specs. Of these I plan to submit to the source tree everything but the driver which I will make available as a hack to anyone that wants it as I plan on using the code elsewhere and I want it GPLd which clashes with the SMSQ/E license.
But it is my personal choice after all as much as it was Marcel's choice for example to release the Aurora driver as a "pay-per-view" (hehe nice term isn't it?). That doesn't change the fact that Aurora thanks to Marcel now has colour that we can actually use, it's just a matter of preference. Can Marcel be blamed? I do not think so. Can Peter be blamed for not wanting to work with SMSQ/E ? I do not think either.
As for Wolfgang's comments I would respectfully disagree. As I said earlier it's anyone's choice how much they value their principles. Maybe Peter (and I do not speak for him rest assured) doesn't want to waiver from his principles and he thinks that the license is of the utmost importance. Everybody has one or more things that they feel extremely strong about be it for software, political or ethical views. Everyone views have to be respected.
In any case I do not think that the issue is more complicated than that. Basically two opposing views in a situation that took a wrong turn somewhere....
Phoebus
P.S. If you are looking for me taking one side over the other you won't find it in this post (Ever the politician. -Ed ;-) I only compiled my opinions just for the heck of it... Peace!
--
Visit the QL-FAQ at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/faq/> (Still uploading stuff!)
Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlx.html>
Visit the uQLX-mac home page at:<http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlxmac.html>
