This slashdot article is misleading. It gives the impression that if your Java code uses an LGPL library then you must provide your source code, permit changes/redistribution etc.
This is not the case. What the FSF guy way saying is "With respect to the LGPL, 'import' in Java is equivalent to linking in C." This means that if you make changes to an LGPL library you use via import in Java, you must make the changes to the LGPL library available to others. This is exactly the same situation which applies in the C world.
The reason the Apache people don't want to use the LGPL (for any language) is that they want their libraries to be under a more permissive license which allows the libraries to be modified without requiring the users to make the changes available.
Some people were suggesting that there was a loophole in the LGPL which meant that they could 'import' a library in Java and avoid having to make changes to the LGPL library available.
The "news" is that the loophole does not exist - the LGPL applies to Java in the same way as it does in C.
This is incorrect with respect to NZ. Until 1996, NZ had the system you described, we call it the "first past the post" system. Since 1996 we've had MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional) system, where parties are allocated seats in parliament in proportion to the number of votes they get. (More or less - there are some details since each person gets two votes in a general election - one for the party and one for a local MP.)
To be passed, a bill requires an absolute majority in parliament, so we have a coalition government, plus some informal coalitions.
Yes, you should always quote variables in shell scripts, but given that iTunes.app is a single file, there is no point to the -r (recursive remove, for removing everything below a directory) option to rm.
Had it only been "rm -f $2...", the damage would have been minimal. (rm -f will not remove directories, hence the only risk would have been if we had e.g. "/Volume1/some directory/iTunes.app" and there was a file named "/Volume1/some".)
I am a first year computer science student. While I have dabbled in C in the past, I am a newbie programmer.
It took me one day to learn ruby, using the online version of the excellent book Programming Ruby.
The next day I wrote a program to log in to a website, extract some information and email it to me. While that might not seem like a great achievement, it was the first time I had ever used hashes, iterators (which is definitely a cool feature of ruby), exceptions, http or cookies.
I was able to do this because ruby makes it so easy. Things tend to work the way you expect them to.
I would expect that if you have already used Perl or Python, you will find ruby even easier to learn.
Some other posters have mentioned the lack of "community support". I find the people on comp.lang.ruby to be extraordinarily helpful, with the creator of ruby (Matz) and one of the authors of Programming Ruby (Dave) often helping people with their problems.
Slashdot Mirror
This slashdot article is misleading. It gives the impression that if your Java code uses an LGPL library then you must provide your source code, permit changes/redistribution etc.
This is not the case. What the FSF guy way saying is "With respect to the LGPL, 'import' in Java is equivalent to linking in C." This means that if you make changes to an LGPL library you use via import in Java, you must make the changes to the LGPL library available to others. This is exactly the same situation which applies in the C world.
The reason the Apache people don't want to use the LGPL (for any language) is that they want their libraries to be under a more permissive license which allows the libraries to be modified without requiring the users to make the changes available.
Some people were suggesting that there was a loophole in the LGPL which meant that they could 'import' a library in Java and avoid having to make changes to the LGPL library available.
The "news" is that the loophole does not exist - the LGPL applies to Java in the same way as it does in C.
Pronunciations of "six":
Australians say "sex".
New Zealanders say "sux".
This is incorrect with respect to NZ. Until 1996, NZ had the system you described, we call it the
"first past the post" system. Since 1996 we've had
MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional) system, where parties are allocated seats in parliament in
proportion to the number of votes they get. (More or less - there are some details since each person
gets two votes in a general election - one for the party and one for a local MP.)
To be passed, a bill requires an absolute majority in parliament, so we have a coalition government, plus some informal coalitions.
>But iTunes.app IS a folder, under MacOSX a .app
Ah, I stand corrected. Thank you.
> rm -rf $2Applications/iTunes.app
Yes, you should always quote variables in shell scripts, but given that iTunes.app is a single file, there is no point to the -r (recursive remove, for removing everything below a directory) option to rm.
Had it only been "rm -f $2...", the damage would have been minimal. (rm -f will not remove directories, hence the only risk would have been if we had e.g. "/Volume1/some directory/iTunes.app" and there was a file named "/Volume1/some".)
It took me one day to learn ruby, using the online version of the excellent book Programming Ruby.
The next day I wrote a program to log in to a website, extract some information and email it to me. While that might not seem like a great achievement, it was the first time I had ever used hashes, iterators (which is definitely a cool feature of ruby), exceptions, http or cookies.
I was able to do this because ruby makes it so easy. Things tend to work the way you expect them to.
I would expect that if you have already used Perl or Python, you will find ruby even easier to learn.
Some other posters have mentioned the lack of "community support". I find the people on comp.lang.ruby to be extraordinarily helpful, with the creator of ruby (Matz) and one of the authors of Programming Ruby (Dave) often helping people with their problems.