Victor wrote:
I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking against
GPL shared libraries makes your application GPL as well?
From the GPL faqs:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingWithGPL
If that's the case, shouldn't TiVo's entire application suite be GPL'ed
Skunk;148155 Wrote:
I can't believe someone finally said it out loud!
You have to admit it's a great business model- not only getting your
customers to contribute software, but perform the bulk of tech support
as well!
Kudos Slim Devices :-)
User self-help is pretty much standard
I am an open source developer, and have been for ten years or more. Not
on SlimServer, but on Info-Zip.org.
I do this because:
1) I like seeing my ideas out there, and people enjoying what product I
put out.
2) I truly enjoy coding - when I have the time - and it makes a good
hobby that
from an interview with Dean
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/024oct06/features/squeezebox/
--
EFP
EFP's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6651
View this thread:
JSonnabend;149470 Wrote:
To my knowledge, this has never been tested in court. In my
understanding, the whole you link to it you're infected position is
based on a twisted definition of derivative work under copyright law.
I'd gladly take a case from an accused linker pro bono on this
CatBus;150056 Wrote:
If I use GPL header files and libraries in code I wrote, and then
compile it, the resulting binary must be distributed under a GPL
compatible license.
I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking against
GPL shared libraries makes your application
On 10/26/06, Victor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CatBus;150056 Wrote: If I use GPL header files and libraries in code I wrote, and then
compile it, the resulting binary must be distributed under a GPL compatible license.I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking againstGPL shared
Victor;150085 Wrote:
I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking against
GPL shared libraries makes your application GPL as well?
Libraries are typically under the LGPL for this reason.
--
snarlydwarf
On 10/26/06, Victor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking against
GPL shared libraries makes your application GPL as well?
If that's the case, shouldn't TiVo's entire application suite be GPL'ed
since they link against the GPL licensed stdlib?
Mark Norton;148618 Wrote:
What's interesting about all of this is that there seems to be general
agreement that Sean deserves his $20m but that the team of developers
who have played a huge role in getting SD where they are deserve
nothing at all - aside perhaps from a free SB and continued
Victor;150085 Wrote:
I am curious as to how you derived this conclusion that linking against
GPL shared libraries makes your application GPL as well?
Depends on what you call your application. Your source code, which
is 100% written by you, may be distributed under whatever license you
see
AndrueC;148588 Wrote:
Okay I can accept the arguments about quality (don't neccessarily agree
but I can accept them). What I still don't see is:
If I worked on FireFox or Open Office who would be putting money into
my bank account? Fine if some people don't want money then good for
them but
even linking to GPL libraries has a viral quality to it (e.g. you can't
just make it a kernel module)
To my knowledge, this has never been tested in court. In my
understanding, the whole you link to it you're infected position is
based on a twisted definition of derivative work under copyright
6.5.0 has been the best SlimServer by far for me. No install issues, no
tag issues, fast, reliable.
--
Mark Lanctot
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread:
bklaas;148202 Wrote:
here's the manifesto that answers that question in great detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar
embracing the idea that code shouldn't cost money is difficult for many
to grasp, I know. My philosophy usually boils down to: pay for physical
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 12:45:36PM -0700, AndrueC wrote:
Okay I can accept the arguments about quality (don't neccessarily agree
but I can accept them). WhatI stil don't see is:
If I worked on FireFox or Open Office who would be putting several
thousand pounds a month into my bank account?
-
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 04:53:38PM -0700, CatBus wrote:
In fact this whole thread could be said to be founded on a
misconception. You are allowed to sell GPL software for money. You
are allowed to make a profit from your sales of GPL software. You are
allowed to resell software that someone
What's interesting about all of this is that there seems to be general
agreement that Sean deserves his $20m but that the team of developers
who have played a huge role in getting SD where they are deserve
nothing at all - aside perhaps from a free SB and continued rights to
software which may or
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:48:07PM -0700, Mark Norton wrote:
What's interesting about all of this is that there seems to be general
agreement that Sean deserves his $20m but that the team of developers
who have played a huge role in getting SD where they are deserve
nothing at all - aside
I disagree. No monetary payment was expected or promised. Slim Devices has been a for-profit company from the beginning. If contributors did not want to write code that could drive sales for a company, then they should not have done it. Nobody was misled or cheated.
On 10/21/06, Mark Norton [EMAIL
I do actually Bill. I own half of a privately held software company and
know all the issues.
--
Mark Norton
Mark Norton's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4722
View this thread:
Sheesh Mark, is everything about money with you? There are other things
in life too.
Did you ever notice a very relevant quote on Slim Devices' Community
page?
He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without
lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 03:20:15PM -0700, Mark Norton wrote:
I do actually Bill. I own half of a privately held software company and
know all the issues.
why did you say that Sean is getting $20M? surely he is not the only
shareholder. there are developers who work for Slim Devices. there are
bill fumerola;148604 Wrote:
if you release the software in binary format, you are obligated to make
the change(s) you made to the GPL software available to the public.
That's not correct. When you sell software under the GPL, you only
need to make the source code available, upon request, to
Chip Hart;148162 Wrote:
Mark Norton wrote:
Open Source/GPL may be a good idea, but not when some people
profiteer
on the back of other people's efforts.
That's the way it is, isn't it?
I dunno, because the various game engines (quake, doom, et al)
have made some
Jacob Potter;148159 Wrote:
Not for me...
I personally write/contribute code because (a) I want whatever feature
I'm adding, scratching my own itch, and (b) I like seeing others use
and enjoy my work. That's the community feel-good factor. The money
from the devices is going to a different
Mark Norton;148164 Wrote:
Sure there's the satisfaction element but it would have been nice to
feel that $20m was being spread more widely across the people who made
it happen.
On a per line of code or number of forum posts basis?
You must be kidding.
If you participate in an open source
I've never for the life of me been able to see how the act creating open
source software could be a business in any way shape or form, except
one destined to go out of business.
The act of contributing to open source software is a Charitable Act,
pure and simple.
Now, the question you have to
If you're not getting paid, does it matter who's not paying you?
--
Kyle
Kyle's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2541
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28873
jonheal;148173 Wrote:
Now, the question you have to ask yourself is: Do people that drive
Porshces need charity? ;-)
Well, Porches aside, ;-), we did know who the company personnel were
and they were extremely active in the forum. It shows a genuine
interest and concern for their customers.
I did not contribute to SlimServer but own 50% of a software company and
I don't do anything for free. Nothing, and I charge on the basis of
value delivered, not time taken or costs incurred.
I was interested in understanding how the people who did contribute
feel about the acquisition of SD by
I believe Mark posted in good spirit, and wasn't trying to do this, but
this thread is a borderline troll for flame responses from Open Source
proponents. You're really missing the point and spirit of Open Source
development, and I hope some of the responses have done something to
clear that up.
Mark Norton;148182 Wrote:
Is Open Source really a philanthropic gesture? Does it matter that you
might struggle to pay the bills/fix up the car/put your kid through
college as long as somebody really likes your sort algortihm? Isn't
there a tinge of envy out there, a feeling that it should
AndrueC;148186 Wrote:
That being the case - why are so many people so keen on making
everything open source?
I think at least part of the motivation must be that being open source
ensures the longevity of the software. SlimServer will undoubtedly
survive, whether contributions will continue
bklaas;148185 Wrote:
Code is GPLed, which means it is not owned by Slimdevices, and can be
distributed at will.
Yes - Logitech doesn't own SlimServer any more than Slim Devices ever
did. Which is why Roku can use it, and there isn't anything anyone can
do about it. That's the downside, your
Mark Norton;148182 Wrote:
Is Open Source really a philanthropic gesture? Does it matter that you
might struggle to pay the bills/fix up the car/put your kid through
college as long as somebody really likes your sort algortihm? Isn't
there a tinge of envy out there, a feeling that it should
AndrueC;148186 Wrote:
That being the case - why are so many people so keen on making
everything open source?
here's the manifesto that answers that question in great detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar
embracing the idea that code shouldn't cost money is
CardinalFang;148191 Wrote:
I think at least part of the motivation must be that being open source
ensures the longevity of the software. SlimServer will undoubtedly
survive, whether contributions will continue in the same volume is up
for debate, but it'll still be there.
Whether there
It's incredible how many people can't understand I'm doing anything for
free. Everybody just feels like telling me why don't you make money of
it all the time. It's not (only) Mark's remarks. It's my friends or my
family as well.
I'm glad I have a job (again) to pay my bills. And a little
Mark Norton;148182 Wrote:
I did not contribute to SlimServer but own 50% of a software company and
I don't do anything for free. Nothing, and I charge on the basis of
value delivered, not time taken or costs incurred.
You seem to think that all OS contributors are starving, unemployed
Mark Lanctot;148179 Wrote:
Well, Porches aside, ;-), we did know who the company personnel were and
they were extremely active in the forum. It shows a genuine interest
and concern for their customers. He didn't just take the money and
run if you will.
Sean made the first SliMP3s in his
jonheal;148219 Wrote:
Well, I was being a little silly, hence the smiley face. But anyway, in
response to all the gut-wrenching over this issue: Who said life was
fair!?! :-)
Yes, I did realize that, and I didn't mean to pick on it.
But there are some things that deserve to be rewarded with
Mark Lanctot;148230 Wrote:
No. Do I want wealth? Yes. Do I deserve it? Yes, if only for being a
nice guy. :-) But that doesn't quite cut it.
Hah! yer in Canada. We're only entitled to 54% wealth at best! :)
-k
--
kdf
Personally I'd love a Porsche. Who wouldn't?
Me.
--
Michael
-
http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD
http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography, MusicInfoSCR
Why would logitech buy the slimserver? They could just take it.
On a similar note, why would they buy two devices they could certainly
engineer for less than 20 million?
The biggest part of what they bought was , IMHO , a network of support
for such devices.
--
Skunk
Skunk;148249 Wrote:
Why would logitech buy the slimserver? They could just take it.
On a similar note, why would they buy two devices they could certainly
engineer for less than 20 million?
The biggest part of what they bought was , IMHO , a network of support
for such devices.
What
Mark Norton wrote:
No Chip, you haven't but in the case of SS, those not rich at all
folks are getting precisely nothing as I understand it. That's one
distribution which is heavily skewed.
Actually, you got PLENTY and it was spelled out in black and
white. You, and everyone
I'm glad I have a job (again) to pay my bills. And a little spare time to
contribute to a great project. It's fun.
I'm glad you have that time, too, because I use a handful of
your plugins all the time.
So, thanks.
--
Chip Hart - Pediatric Solutions *
jonheal wrote:
I've never for the life of me been able to see how the act creating open
source software could be a business in any way shape or form, except
one destined to go out of business.
All the evidence otherwise hasn't convinced you, eh? I guess
I should call RedHat
Mark Lanctot wrote:
My Transporter was just delivered.
...and you're responding to email?
--
Chip Hart - Pediatric Solutions * Physician's Computer Company
chip @ pcc.com * 1 Main St. #7, Winooski, VT 05404
800-722-7708 *
Chip Hart;148301 Wrote:
Mark Lanctot wrote:
My Transporter was just delivered.
...and you're responding to email?
Err blush
I will have to do some significant re-arranging of my equipment to
accommodate it.
Plus, well, that aircraft aluminum really takes on the cold! It's
Mark Lanctot;148309 Wrote:
But I have all weekend to play with it, and forever after that.
Only until you die.
(god i'm in a cheery mood tonight...)
--
funkstar
funkstar's Profile:
funkstar;148313 Wrote:
Only until you die.
(god i'm in a cheery mood tonight...)
That's why I put forever in quotes. ;-)
Also, for me, half the fun is setting it up. It's like Christmas
morning. I want to savour it and go at it slowly. I'm also taking
photos every step of the way.
--
Enjoy your new toy...
--
Mark Norton
Mark Norton's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4722
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28873
At 11:24 AM -0700 10/20/06, Mark Lanctot wrote:
funkstar;148313 Wrote:
Only until you die.
(god i'm in a cheery mood tonight...)
That's why I put forever in quotes. ;-)
Also, for me, half the fun is setting it up. It's like Christmas
morning. I want to savour it and go at it slowly.
Open Source/GPL may be a good idea, but not when some people profiteer
on the back of other people's efforts.
I think the biggest point has yet to be made.
What's to stop -you- from doing the same? It's open source. Someone
wants to buy it off you, then sell it to them. They could just as
Logitech- keep it open source or I'll be angry !
--
wotuzu17
wotuzu17's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7376
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28873
Well, actually, I believe in rewarding people who work for me based on
their contribution and as far back as 1981 I was co-founder of a
company which placed its entire share capital into a trust so that all
employees, me included, could be rewarded based on their contribution
without interference
People that are acting like they were sold out and won't reap any
benefits from the SD/Logitech deal have got to be kidding.
Did you put up any real capital to get the company off the ground? Did
you pay any of Slim Devices bills when there was a cash flow problem
(every company runs into
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
So what? I'm having fun in my free time. Something money can hardly buy.
It's more than worked for me. Since some
bklaas;148202 Wrote:
Firefox (open-source) vs. IE (proprietary)
Wikipedia (open-source) vs. Encylopedia Brittanica/Encarta/Whatever
(proprietary)
I know that's the canonical comparison, but it has a bit of a problem
(IMHO).
Firefox, I believe, still goes through testing cycles. And the
Mark Lanctot;148275 Wrote:
I love paying TWO taxes on something that wasn't even made in this
country.
Why 2? There should have been no US tax.
--
Michaelwagner
Michaelwagner's Profile:
Michaelwagner;148348 Wrote:
Why 2? There should have been no US tax.
PST + GST.
--
Mark Lanctot
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread:
ah, sorry, misunderstood. Yes, PST on goods imported from the US.
--
Michaelwagner
Michaelwagner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=428
View this thread:
On 10/20/06, Mark Norton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
No, the point of this thread is for you to point out that you
Michael Herger;148347 Wrote:
I have no car. But a bicycle.
Ah, yes, but is it a Porche bicycle?
--
Michaelwagner
Michaelwagner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=428
View this thread:
Mark Norton;148341 Wrote:
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
Poppycock. Complete and utter poppycock. You're implying OS developers
don't get
Mark Norton;148341 Wrote:
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
Crap. Utter crap. I am being taken for a ride if I WANT recompense and
don't get
Mark Norton;148341 Wrote:
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
That was your point in starting the thread.
You're welcome to make your point.
And
Ah, yes, but is it a Porche bicycle?
I'm afraid, no. It's a simpel.ch - rather the Skoda aforementioned :-)
--
Michael
-
http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD
http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography,
You are not being taken for a ride. You contribute with your eyes open as to the situation. You know you are not going to be compensated monetarily, and choose to do so anyway. Thus, you presumably do it for other reasons. Numerous people have explained their motivations.
Everything I do in life
Mark Norton;148341 Wrote:
The whole point of this thread is to point out to people working with
Open Source that you are being taken for a ride if you do not receive
commercial recompense for your efforts.
Yup... as you'll know, having three cars and one driver... these goods
are very hollow
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 07:28:03AM -0700, Mark Norton wrote:
It will be interesting to see if Logitech can actually cope with the
informal structure and slightly anarchic environment of Open
Source/GPL.
ever heard of a little company called Apple Computer?
-- bill
I derive huge satisfaction from the programming work I do, in a market
leading product, but I do it on a strictly commercial basis.
OS may be fine when all is going well but there's a lack of
accountability when the quality nose-dives. Anybody think 6.5 is worth
installing? Whoever thinks they
Now you're no longer on your original subject. In your original post you said that the Logitech acquisition somehow betrayed the feel-good motivation for contributing to OS, which is not a sentiment shared by very many, apparently.
The effectiveness of OS is a separate discussion.On 10/20/06, Mark
On 10/20/06, Mark Norton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MySQL? Oh, please...!
The MySQL decision and implementation were both done by Slim Devices
employees, not outside contributors, and would likely have been the
same whether SlimServer was open-source or not.
I think this is a troll thread.
-
Mark Norton;148380 Wrote:
Anybody think 6.5 is worth installing?
Whoever thinks they have random track play sorted is dreaming.
MySQL? Oh, please...!
OS working? I don't think so.
TROLL.
runs away
--
bklaas
the Nokia770 skin guy
OS working? I don't think so.
If it wasn't, neither MS nor Apple would be where they are today: Windows
2003 wouldn't be as stable as it is thanks to the increased pressure from
those OS systems, and Apple OS X would not come with such product as
Apache, Samba, Konqueror (just to name a
Mitch Harding;148383 Wrote:
In your original post you
said that the Logitech acquisition somehow betrayed the feel-good
motivation
for contributing to OS, which is not a sentiment shared by very many,
apparently.
In fact this whole thread could be said to be founded on a
misconception.
Mark Norton;148380 Wrote:
Anybody think 6.5 is worth installing?
On my system, it's vastly superior to what I was using (6.2.2). Much
faster in all regards, and has exhibited no strange behavior in my
heavily-used network of 5 players.
--
Pale Blue Ego
Likewise. I had an install issue when I first tried it, but when I did a full uninstall of the previous version, that cleared up. I'm running 6.5 right now with no issues.On 10/20/06,
Pale Blue Ego [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Norton;148380 Wrote: Anybody think 6.5 is worth installing?On my
81 matches
Mail list logo
