www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - License questions

reply Helmut Leitner <helmut.leitner chello.at> writes:
I'd like to publish a number of modules as "Venus"-library 
under an appropriate license. 

I would like to make everything 
   - available for future versions of Phobos / D without restrictions
   - available to the public und domething like GPL
I'd like to draw from Phobos and other existing OS libraries
and libraries and refactor a few things.

How is the license situation and how can I fit in? 

--
Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at   
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Apr 23 2003
next sibling parent reply "Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> writes:
I too would like to understand the (clear) picture regarding D, especially
in respect of possible contributions to Phobos (for which I have a few ideas
brewing).

As far as I can tell there seems to be no formal procedure. Of course we all
dislike formality, but it seems like there should be some kind of mechanism
for enhancing/expanding Phobos.


"Helmut Leitner" <helmut.leitner chello.at> wrote in message
news:3EA68886.998338AD chello.at...

 I'd like to publish a number of modules as "Venus"-library
 under an appropriate license.

 I would like to make everything
    - available for future versions of Phobos / D without restrictions
    - available to the public und domething like GPL
 I'd like to draw from Phobos and other existing OS libraries
 and libraries and refactor a few things.

 How is the license situation and how can I fit in?

 --
 Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
 Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Apr 23 2003
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
The easiest would be to just make it public domain.

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> wrote in message
news:b866h0$182$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I too would like to understand the (clear) picture regarding D, especially
 in respect of possible contributions to Phobos (for which I have a few


ideas

 brewing).

 As far as I can tell there seems to be no formal procedure. Of course we


all

 dislike formality, but it seems like there should be some kind of


mechanism

 for enhancing/expanding Phobos.
Apr 23 2003
parent reply "Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> writes:
I don't understand. Do you mean make the code (one wishes to contribute)
public-domain, rather than worrying about it going into Phobos?

To me at least, it seems that there are a great many projects dotted around,
of a variety of types (some basic library infrastructure, some specific
tools/technologies), and it's been observed numerous times that there is no
good (definitive and visible) central repository/forum.

And if that is what you do mean, how does that help with Phobos? For myself
(and I suspect for Helmut and quite a number of others) I have a strong
interest in contributing to Phobos. Not only is there the attraction of
"being in the runtime" but also because there are areas in which it is
lacking and especially that there is a desire to help D fulfil its
potential. The idea of just having another little library out there in the
aether has far less appeal, from the perspective of any of the motivations
given above.

What I (we) want is this:
 - a drive/movement/willingness from D (i.e. you) to encourage and be open
to expansion of the runtime library from contributors
 - a mechanism for ensuring conformance to the D vision, quality,
efficiency, and avoiding having Java/.NET/MSVCRT-sized bloating.
 - a group, not just one individual, who can respond to errors in the
library, with fixes and advice. (This may mean still

Now I don't know the precise form that this should take (we're not
suggesting that you allow us shell access into your source code control
database and build system), but the way things are structure at the moment
is far from encouraging to potential contributors.

I can't speak for others, but I don't have a problem with donating my IP to
Phobos.

Am I correct in assuming that the above is representative of most of the
members of the D community, or am I just whistling in the wind? Please speak
out either way

One of the clear draws of .NET and Java is that they have very extensive -
and very useful, if we're honest - libraries. It seems to me that a
powerful, but fat-free, library for D will be critical in making D a
success.

People want to contribute, they just don't see how.



"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:b86psp$eum$2 digitaldaemon.com...

 The easiest would be to just make it public domain.

 "Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> wrote in message
 news:b866h0$182$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I too would like to understand the (clear) picture regarding D,




especially

 in respect of possible contributions to Phobos (for which I have a few


 ideas

 brewing).

 As far as I can tell there seems to be no formal procedure. Of course we


 all

 dislike formality, but it seems like there should be some kind of


 mechanism

 for enhancing/expanding Phobos.
Apr 23 2003
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
One thing I do wish to avoid is a tangle of conflicting licenses in Phobos.
So, any contributions to the core Phobos should be clearly marked as one of
the following:

1) public domain
2) donated to Digital Mars (and I'll put a credit in for the author)
3) copyrighted by the contributor but an unlimited free license is granted
for any purpose

Modifications / bug fixes to existing Phobos code should be (2).

I welcome the development of add-ons, and certainly the development of 3rd
party libraries for D. These can be under any license the author wishes,
including commercial licenses or GPL.

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> wrote in message
news:b87819$o78$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I don't understand. Do you mean make the code (one wishes to contribute)
 public-domain, rather than worrying about it going into Phobos?

 To me at least, it seems that there are a great many projects dotted


around,

 of a variety of types (some basic library infrastructure, some specific
 tools/technologies), and it's been observed numerous times that there is


no

 good (definitive and visible) central repository/forum.

 And if that is what you do mean, how does that help with Phobos? For


myself

 (and I suspect for Helmut and quite a number of others) I have a strong
 interest in contributing to Phobos. Not only is there the attraction of
 "being in the runtime" but also because there are areas in which it is
 lacking and especially that there is a desire to help D fulfil its
 potential. The idea of just having another little library out there in the
 aether has far less appeal, from the perspective of any of the motivations
 given above.

 What I (we) want is this:
  - a drive/movement/willingness from D (i.e. you) to encourage and be open
 to expansion of the runtime library from contributors
  - a mechanism for ensuring conformance to the D vision, quality,
 efficiency, and avoiding having Java/.NET/MSVCRT-sized bloating.
  - a group, not just one individual, who can respond to errors in the
 library, with fixes and advice. (This may mean still

 Now I don't know the precise form that this should take (we're not
 suggesting that you allow us shell access into your source code control
 database and build system), but the way things are structure at the moment
 is far from encouraging to potential contributors.

 I can't speak for others, but I don't have a problem with donating my IP


to

 Phobos.

 Am I correct in assuming that the above is representative of most of the
 members of the D community, or am I just whistling in the wind? Please


speak

 out either way

 One of the clear draws of .NET and Java is that they have very extensive -
 and very useful, if we're honest - libraries. It seems to me that a
 powerful, but fat-free, library for D will be critical in making D a
 success.

 People want to contribute, they just don't see how.



 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:b86psp$eum$2 digitaldaemon.com...

 The easiest would be to just make it public domain.

 "Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> wrote in message
 news:b866h0$182$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I too would like to understand the (clear) picture regarding D,




 especially

 in respect of possible contributions to Phobos (for which I have a few


 ideas

 brewing).

 As far as I can tell there seems to be no formal procedure. Of course






we

 all

 dislike formality, but it seems like there should be some kind of


 mechanism

 for enhancing/expanding Phobos.
Apr 23 2003
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
One way is to make it explicitly public domain. If not, what rights do you
wish to retain? A possibility would be a dual GPL/whatever license.

"Helmut Leitner" <helmut.leitner chello.at> wrote in message
news:3EA68886.998338AD chello.at...

 I'd like to publish a number of modules as "Venus"-library
 under an appropriate license.

 I would like to make everything
    - available for future versions of Phobos / D without restrictions
    - available to the public und domething like GPL
 I'd like to draw from Phobos and other existing OS libraries
 and libraries and refactor a few things.

 How is the license situation and how can I fit in?

 --
 Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
 Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Apr 23 2003
parent reply Helmut Leitner <leitner hls.via.at> writes:
Walter wrote:

 
 One way is to make it explicitly public domain. If not, what rights do you
 wish to retain? 


If I would e. g. take a module from Phobos, improve on it and publish it as 
public domain this would in effect put parts of Phobos into the public domain.

Am I allowed to do this? There is no clear statement about Phobos copyrights.
Many files have no notice, some carry an "All Rights Reserved" label...

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Apr 23 2003
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Helmut Leitner" <leitner hls.via.at> wrote in message
news:3EA6F8A6.BBBC5A9 hls.via.at...

 Walter wrote:

 One way is to make it explicitly public domain. If not, what rights do




you

 wish to retain?


 If I would e. g. take a module from Phobos, improve on it and publish it


as

 public domain this would in effect put parts of Phobos into the public


domain.

 Am I allowed to do this? There is no clear statement about Phobos


copyrights.

 Many files have no notice, some carry an "All Rights Reserved" label...


I should revisit that. In the meantime, the easiest thing to do is you can
donate the changes to Digital Mars, and I'll put a credit for you in the
source.
Apr 23 2003