User Feedback :: JohnMurga



Quote
In that respect it helps to talk, and I feel mikshaw would make a perfect bridge if he desired because of his prior involvement and extremely helpful and even handed demeanor at all times ... He did make me enjoy supporting DSL when things where going well.
*snifl*
I'm very pleased that things are cooling off...it was getting frustrating because I greatly appreciate both DSL and murgaLua as the two projects that have inspired me over anything else in Linux, and I could understand many of the concerns and comments made on both sides of the issue.

It is apparent that much of what was said from both ends was influenced by emotion, and I really hope something can be worked out that will satisfy everyone concerned.  The thought of abandoning such a great tool in addition to harboring bad feelings is something that just can't be allowed to happen, particularly in communities which claim to help, inspire, and share with others.
Quote (mikshaw @ June 19 2008,22:01)
*snif


Whinner!
Quote
It is apparent that much of what was said from both ends was influenced by emotion...

Speaking for yourself?

No matter how useful this compilation of software has been, I'm concerned that DSL will now trade a little "security" for liberty. You can find what Ben Franklin said about those elsewhere. ;)

There's a bigger principle involved here than his or anyone's emotions. It's about the right to the see the sources, the right to change the sources to suit one's own needs (rather than the developer's), and the right to redistribute those changes.

DSL didn't change code, just the compilation so the parts could be used independently rather than the full sum. This negates all of his claims that anything was changed. If there needs to be a copyright notice, make it suitable. But I don't see RMS everytime I cp, mv, or tar something. I don't need to see Murga's name every time I run something like lua or fltk. (I won't see it anyway but that's my right.)

As far as that little bit of security I mentioned goes, you saw how this was handled by Murga. Have we had an answer about why it's only an issue NOW that copyright notices aren't prominently displayed when lua -- with or without the rest of the runtime -- is invoked? What will happen next time someone chooses to use the freedom afforded by the license he chose for his project? Will they again be reflexively accused of pilfering code? Of removing things that haven't been removed? Of changing things that haven't been changed? Of daring to embrace the freedom of having the source to suit *our own needs* so long as we comply with the rest of the GPL? Or will he continue moving goalposts so things that weren't required before are required now?

What good is the code -- what good is the GPL -- if you're unable to use it as you see fit?

I know John and Robert are trying to mend a fence even though they didn't break it. Maybe this isn't one that shouldn't be mended.

If DSL sacrifices the freedom of the GPL in this instance, where will it cut the next corner?

Fork the code. You don't need his permission to use it. Just make the proper attributions and acknowledgments as they were status quo ante -- before Murga changed his mind about his license (and what it means for users) and about all the new hoops he wants DSL to jump through.

(edited: moved one sentence)
Lucky13....maybe it's time for your own distro?
Er .. Lucky ..  I'm not sure I understand all the subtleties here and certainly not all of the history, but  it does look like a resolution has been achieved.  I'd be inclined to go with that.  It's John and Robert's decision anyway.

The problem with doing a fork is someone with the appropriate skills then has to maintain it.  Who is that going to be?

I'd tend to err on the side of respecting the wishes of the murga lua copyright holder, or of any software author over ideological correctness.   It could (?) be that the GPL does not adequately reflect John Murga's wishes for his code.  Assuming he is copyright holder, it could be that John Murga could turn nasty and (theoretically at least) re-license the non-derived parts of a future release of Murga Lua under a much more restrictive license. In which case we could be screwed as far as updates and bug fixes are concerned.

Being pragmatic here, it's generally better just to respect the wishes of the author than risk encouraging him or her to put all or part of their code under some awful license?
Next Page...
original here.