The guy in the dormroom next door to me is a graphics art major. He uses only Mac, owns 3 electric guitars and two acoustics, etc... He was extremely impressed with the default Dolphin look. I think it looks great. In terms of logon times, she sure isn't sitting at my machine. I just tested a console logon, and there was no delay percieved. My scroll mouse did get a wrong default, but if you actually read where it says to initialize with the scroll, its obviously wrong and correctable via tabbing. Not good, but not so bad as she suggests.
I tend to bounce from Debian to Mandrake to SuSE and back. I enjoy the variety. It seems that Mandrake does configure for a more easily used enviornment. Its also the distribution where everything just works when I install it. My mouse scrolls, my USB printer prints, my soundcard was recognized, and my monitor appeared in the list of monitors. Very sweet. Very easy. I like Debian for all the religious reasons, and apt-get/attitude. SuSE's emacs is compiled with nice solid options. But I'd only recomend Mandrake for a Newbie.
"The IBM figures for the 1.3GHz Power4 are for a uni-processor IBM eServer pSeries 690 Turbo running AIX 5L V5.1 with 128MB of L3 cache and 64GB of RAM running AIX 5L V5.1"
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2002/debian-devel-announce-200210/msg00002.html It has come to the attention of several Debian developers that any of us may be exposed to tort claims from BitMover, Inc., the company that produces BitKeeper, the software that is in wide usage as a revision-control system among Linux kernel developers.
Specifically, the BitKeeper license states the following:
(d) Notwithstanding any other terms in this License, this License is not available to You if You and/or your employer develop, produce, sell, and/or resell a product which contains substantially similar capabilities of the BitKeeper Software, or, in the reasonable opinion of BitMover, competes with the BitKeeper Software.... Take special note that:
* The license on the "anything" containing substantially similar capabilities to BitKeeper *does not matter*. In other words, if you or employer develops, produces, sells, or resells anything containing, say Subversion or CVS, you have no gratis license to use BitKeeper.
* BitMover reserves the right to express its "reasonable opinion" about what does and does not compete with BitKeeper. The burden is on *you to persuade them in *each* and *every* case that the work you do doesn't "compete" with BitKeeper. Alternatively, you could take BitMover to court and seek something like a declaratory judgement.
Yet, thats where Larry posts liscense issues. Thats where the discussion was taking place.
Who are you to tell them where they can discuss kernel issues?
From: David S. Miller
Subject: Re: New BK License Problem?
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 17:04:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roman Zippel
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 00:36:16 +0200 (CEST)
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> Just to be clear; ... this is completely offtopic, can this _please_ be moved to a bk list?
Thanks.
It is very ontopic because it affects a number of kernel developers.
Whether you like BK or not, it is the primary source management tool
used by Linus and others, it is even documented in the source tree as
such.
Therefore, such a license change could change that, so it's a relavant
topic.
And finally, as the person who has to maintain this list and deal with
the daily bounce pool this list generates every day, I declare it as
ontopic so:-P~~~~~~
The clause is specifically designed to target those companies which produce or sell commercial SCM systems. That's why we explicitly left out "distribute". The open source developers have nothing to worry about.
Ben Collins who also happens to spend some time working on a open source SCM (subversion) then asked if the clause applied to him. Note that he does not work for a company selling subversion, and he is a open source developer.
Larry informs him:
> Would it be your intention that your license disallow my type of work? I > think it does.
You bet it does. The Subversion folks would like nothing better than to displace BK. That's fine, but they don't get to use BK to do it. You're absolutely correct that you could use BK to make Subversion better. It is not our job to help you make Subversion better and we've made that clear for a long time.
This seems to me to be a clear reversal of his stated position. To me this reversal is the central point of the thread, not people bemoaning that BK is propritary. Troy Benjegerdes crystalize this thread perfectly IMNHO:
But until Larry retires, I have found it much easier to think of the Bitkeeper license as the "don't piss off Larry license". Don't antagonize Larry, or directly mess up his business model, and you'll all get along find;P
"Unfortuantly, it's only people who haven't touched any piece of Linux code in their lives who are complaining."
From: Alan Cox
Subject: Re: New BK License Problem?
Date: 06 Oct 2002 00:50:27 +0100
On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 00:28, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Because Linus is using BK it is easier for him to make his work in
> progress available, so he does. Before he was using BK, you got a
> snapshot when he put up for ftp. It is an absolute fact that Linus
> tree is far more quickly available, via regular patches or BK, than
> it was before he used BK.
Linus used to do about a patch every 2 days. Nowdays its a lot slower. I
put that down to buttkeeper.
Yes, you can use GPL-ed software in your closed-source software as long as it remains closed down tight to only you . You can tweak it, and teach it to sit up and beg, and do whatever you want as long as you don't distribute. Might say, "you can use GPL-software in your closed-source software as long as you keep it closed-binary, too":-)
Re:Something I hope to see soon
on
Blender Is GPL
·
· Score: 3, Informative
http://www.quelsolaar.com/technology/verse.html " V E R S E
Verse is a network protocol, for three-dimensional, client/server graphic applications, designed to let anyone build and distribute a 3D "world" on the Internet. We use it to create distrobuted work eviorments and enabel multiple people and applications work togeter. While other build one integrated proprietary system we beleave that the future lies in connecting multipel differnt application seamlessly. If you are looking for a plygg in interface this is it.
Verse is writen using UDP for low latency and has been optimized for low bandwith. Verse has been ported on a number of platforms and is under the GPL license.
Verse can also be used as the basis for games, simulation, VR, computational stearing visualization, Social activitys and Rapid prototyping. You can find more about verse on verse homepage at: verse.sf.net or read Emil brinks exelent paper."
Re:why so many mouse buttons?
on
Blender Is GPL
·
· Score: 2
Ask yourself, "how many fingers do I have on that hand holding the mouse". Consider that perhaps not all are equally coordinated...but why deny a mode of input that is literally an extension of our hands? I think there should be room for all modes of input, then let the user choose:-)
Its only "bad design" if you don't use a 3-button mouse. I can't image not having at least a 3-button scroll mouse. Have you considered emulating the middle button? You can configure so that clicking both left and right buttons is accepted as the middle button:-)
Re:Except its bullshit...
on
Blender Is GPL
·
· Score: 2
So what we need is two interfaces which run in parallel, without tripping over each others commands. That is, the "learning" menu-assisted interface should indicate the keystrokes, so that as the student becomes adept the keyboard commands become second nature. Thus, a reduced learning curve to get *something* done (i.e., *anything* to work), without impacting the Pros.
But he says AMD believes that these technologies should be "opt-in" - that the user should control it - not government mandates.
Hollywood and the music industry are lobbying hard to make DRM mandatory in all new devices, and existing laws here and in the US make it a crime to switch it off.
Really, all GPL requires the seller to do is provide a copy of source code to their customers.
If you distribute source code (or source with binaries) to your customers, thats true. If you don't provide source code with the binaries, then you must provide source to anyone who asks for it.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
* a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
* b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
* c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
I personally have no use for a mobile phone. I just want a "palm" device capable of running emacs/octave. I'm looking for a kick-ass scientific calculator, not a communications device.
Well, except perhaps for the Math and Physics and Chemistry departments around here. Seems that there are places besides Legal or Medical where WP has found a niche:-) The only place I see true-blue MS bias is the School of Business...
Opps, more on the same:
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/1168
One interesting point: it did not appear that anyone was arguing that the GPL did not apply or was not a valid license. It sounded as though the GPL was treated as any other license would be in a software context. Judge Saris seemed to focus on the question of whether Gemini constitutes an independent or a derivative work and whether the harm caused to MySQL met the irreparable standard. Experts -- none of whom were permitted to testify today, though Eben Moglen, among others, was in the room -- had filed what the Judge called "classic book-ends," or perfectly conflicting reports, on the question of the derivative work. Much of her questioning surrounded whether Gemini could operate without MySQL (as distributed, MySQL contends, it cannot) and whether or not the two products had been "integrated". She seemed to be moved by the NuSphere argument that there was no co-mingling of the source code and that "linking" to another program did not equate to creation of a derivative work. She also pushed hard on the questions of whether the distribution clause of the GPL was violated, though little progress was made on that point by either side. Ultimately, Judge Saris seemed unconvinced that MySQL could show a likelihood of success on the question of irreparable harm.
All in all it appears that this federal court considers the GPL to be a valid license (which shouldn't be surprising - but it has been an issue from time to time and commented on in the academic literature) with a somewhat ambiguous clause about the obligations that arise when you distribute code that combines GPL code with code that was developed independently.
"We don't expect to have any problem enforcing the GPL in this situation," says Bradley Kuhn, FSF's vice president. Normally, he says, the Free Software Foundation conducts private enforcement of GPL violations on software that it holds the copyright on. In this case, MySQL retains the copyright on its GPLed apps, and the FSF is simply providing expert testimony in what is expected to be an easily-gained temporary injunction against the further distribution of NuSphere's version of MySQL.
Bruce Perens, founder of the Open Source Initiative, has offered to become a moderator in the case if one is needed. "Moglen will get his injunction," he says.
Isn't "average" for the SAT 400 on both verbal and math? So wouldn't you expect most people to score around 800? Would it be fair to suggest that in order to graduate, you must score above average? On a fair test, wouldn't half then not graduate?
Slashdot Mirror
Sweet solution. Hope you get modded up.
The guy in the dormroom next door to me is a graphics art major. He uses only Mac, owns 3 electric guitars and two acoustics, etc... He was extremely impressed with the default Dolphin look. I think it looks great. In terms of logon times, she sure isn't sitting at my machine. I just tested a console logon, and there was no delay percieved. My scroll mouse did get a wrong default, but if you actually read where it says to initialize with the scroll, its obviously wrong and correctable via tabbing. Not good, but not so bad as she suggests.
I tend to bounce from Debian to Mandrake to SuSE and back. I enjoy the variety. It seems that Mandrake does configure for a more easily used enviornment. Its also the distribution where everything just works when I install it. My mouse scrolls, my USB printer prints, my soundcard was recognized, and my monitor appeared in the list of monitors. Very sweet. Very easy. I like Debian for all the religious reasons, and apt-get/attitude. SuSE's emacs is compiled with nice solid options. But I'd only recomend Mandrake for a Newbie.
"The IBM figures for the 1.3GHz Power4 are for a uni-processor IBM eServer pSeries 690 Turbo running AIX 5L V5.1 with 128MB of L3 cache and 64GB of RAM running AIX 5L V5.1"
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2002 /debian-devel-announce-200210/msg00002.html
...
It has come to the attention of several Debian developers that any of us may be exposed to tort claims from BitMover, Inc., the company that produces BitKeeper, the software that is in wide usage as a revision-control system among Linux kernel developers.
Specifically, the BitKeeper license states the following:
(d) Notwithstanding any other terms in this License, this License is not available to You if You and/or your employer develop, produce, sell, and/or resell a product which contains substantially similar capabilities of the BitKeeper Software, or, in the reasonable opinion of BitMover, competes with the BitKeeper Software.
Take special note that:
* The license on the "anything" containing substantially similar capabilities to BitKeeper *does not matter*. In other words, if you or employer develops, produces, sells, or resells anything containing, say Subversion or CVS, you have no gratis license to use BitKeeper.
* BitMover reserves the right to express its "reasonable opinion" about what does and does not compete with BitKeeper. The burden is on *you to persuade them in *each* and *every* case that the work you do doesn't "compete" with BitKeeper. Alternatively, you could take BitMover to court and seek something like a declaratory judgement.
Yet, thats where Larry posts liscense issues. Thats where the discussion was taking place. Who are you to tell them where they can discuss kernel issues?
http://kerneltrap.org/node.php?id=444c uster
;P
"Author:gn
Date:Sunday, 10/06/2002 - 23:51
First Larry states:
The clause is specifically designed to target those companies which
produce or sell commercial SCM systems. That's why we explicitly
left out "distribute". The open source developers have nothing to
worry about.
Ben Collins who also happens to spend some time working on a open source SCM (subversion) then asked if the clause applied to him. Note that he does not work for a company selling subversion, and he is a open source developer.
Larry informs him:
> Would it be your intention that your license disallow my type of work? I
> think it does.
You bet it does. The Subversion folks would like nothing better than
to displace BK. That's fine, but they don't get to use BK to do it.
You're absolutely correct that you could use BK to make Subversion better.
It is not our job to help you make Subversion better and we've made that
clear for a long time.
This seems to me to be a clear reversal of his stated position. To me this reversal is the central point of the thread, not people bemoaning that BK is propritary. Troy Benjegerdes crystalize this thread perfectly IMNHO:
But until Larry retires, I have found it much easier to think of the
Bitkeeper license as the "don't piss off Larry license". Don't antagonize
Larry, or directly mess up his business model, and you'll all get along
find
Is that the kind of license you are ok with?"
"Unfortuantly, it's only people who haven't touched any piece of Linux code in their lives who are complaining."
From: Alan Cox
Subject: Re: New BK License Problem?
Date: 06 Oct 2002 00:50:27 +0100
On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 00:28, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Because Linus is using BK it is easier for him to make his work in
> progress available, so he does. Before he was using BK, you got a
> snapshot when he put up for ftp. It is an absolute fact that Linus
> tree is far more quickly available, via regular patches or BK, than
> it was before he used BK.
Linus used to do about a patch every 2 days. Nowdays its a lot slower. I put that down to buttkeeper.
Yes, you can use GPL-ed software in your closed-source software as long as it remains closed down tight to only you . You can tweak it, and teach it to sit up and beg, and do whatever you want as long as you don't distribute. Might say, "you can use GPL-software in your closed-source software as long as you keep it closed-binary, too" :-)
http://www.quelsolaar.com/technology/verse.html
" V E R S E
Verse is a network protocol, for three-dimensional, client/server graphic applications, designed to let anyone build and distribute a 3D "world" on the Internet. We use it to create distrobuted work eviorments and enabel multiple people and applications work togeter. While other build one integrated proprietary system we beleave that the future lies in connecting multipel differnt application seamlessly. If you are looking for a plygg in interface this is it.
Verse is writen using UDP for low latency and has been optimized for low bandwith. Verse has been ported on a number of platforms and is under the GPL license.
Verse can also be used as the basis for games, simulation, VR, computational stearing visualization, Social activitys and Rapid prototyping. You can find more about verse on verse homepage at: verse.sf.net or read Emil brinks exelent paper."
Ask yourself, "how many fingers do I have on that hand holding the mouse". Consider that perhaps not all are equally coordinated...but why deny a mode of input that is literally an extension of our hands? I think there should be room for all modes of input, then let the user choose :-)
Its only "bad design" if you don't use a 3-button mouse. I can't image not having at least a 3-button scroll mouse. Have you considered emulating the middle button? You can configure so that clicking both left and right buttons is accepted as the middle button :-)
So what we need is two interfaces which run in parallel, without tripping over each others commands. That is, the "learning" menu-assisted interface should indicate the keystrokes, so that as the student becomes adept the keyboard commands become second nature. Thus, a reduced learning curve to get *something* done (i.e., *anything* to work), without impacting the Pros.
But he says AMD believes that these technologies should be "opt-in" - that the user should control it - not government mandates.
Hollywood and the music industry are lobbying hard to make DRM mandatory in all new devices, and existing laws here and in the US make it a crime to switch it off.
Big big difference between property and IP. Can't compare matter with ideas.
If you distribute source code (or source with binaries) to your customers, thats true. If you don't provide source code with the binaries, then you must provide source to anyone who asks for it.
I personally have no use for a mobile phone. I just want a "palm" device capable of running emacs/octave. I'm looking for a kick-ass scientific calculator, not a communications device.
f? I thought functions were all named "lambda"!
Over in our chem. dept there was a duel. Excel vs. octave. Quess which one was 3 orders of magnitude slower?
Our Academic Pricing is $150 for Office. Likewise for the OS.
Emacs/Octave did *everything* for my NumAnal2 class.
Well, except perhaps for the Math and Physics and Chemistry departments around here. Seems that there are places besides Legal or Medical where WP has found a niche :-) The only place I see true-blue MS bias is the School of Business...
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/1168
Bruce Perens, founder of the Open Source Initiative, has offered to become a moderator in the case if one is needed. "Moglen will get his injunction," he says.
Isn't "average" for the SAT 400 on both verbal and math? So wouldn't you expect most people to score around 800? Would it be fair to suggest that in order to graduate, you must score above average? On a fair test, wouldn't half then not graduate?