Re: Announce: PilBox - Building Mobile Apps in PicoLisp

2017-03-13 Thread O.Hamann
.. after having received tons of posts titled 'future', some of them sounding like 'do not know what future will bring' ... .. and now: baam! - once again Alex fetched sth out of the hat (and head of course :-) ) - in variation to the german saying 'aus dem Hut zaubern' Kindly excited (but

Re: Announce: PilBox - Building Mobile Apps in PicoLisp

2017-03-13 Thread Raman Gopalan
Dear Alex, dear PicoLisp community, > it is now possible to build Android Apps completely in PicoLisp! Wow! This is really great Alex! Thank you! Fantastic news. R

Re: Unclear licensing

2017-03-13 Thread Alexander Burger
Hi Christopher, > Nevertheless, I would strongly recommend *at least* putting licensing > information on the JavaScript files, even if only using the one-liner > approach. Since the JavaScript will usually be served through a Web > server, it will be impossible for Web users to tell that it is

Re: Unclear licensing

2017-03-13 Thread Christopher Howard
Right. Admittedly, that is not *so* much of a concern when you are looking at code that you have just unpackaged directly from the release... you can infer that the license in COPYING applies to every unlabeled file in the release. (Though, that leaves open potential for confusion and

Re: Unclear licensing

2017-03-13 Thread Joh-Tob Sch├Ąg
*Actions over Words:* Step 1. Patch the latest download so it contains the license information locally. Step 2.? Step 3. Profit! Hint: ? is finding a new place to host and go to 1. 2017-03-13 19:09 GMT+01:00 Bruno Franco : > I think that what

Re: Unclear licensing

2017-03-13 Thread Bruno Franco
I think that what Christopher means is that adding a licence makes the developer's wishes clear. When you put a permissible licence its obvious you don't care what people do with the code, but if there's no licence at all it *could* mean you don't care, or it *could* mean you do care but just