OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical > Programming

Closed source parts of eComStation

<< < (12/13) > >>

Doug Bissett:

--- Quote ---So I'm still using PMMail 2.2 and here and then a demo of v3 to test some things. I just write this that hopefully I never see that kind of license again on my life.
--- End quote ---

Your loss. PMMail (for OS/2 - the previous owner still owns the windows version) is owned by OS2VOICE and is made available as a bonus for their members. If you don't want to be a member of OS2VOICE, you cannot buy PMMail. It has nothing, at all, to do with the license for PMMail, it is simply the method that OS2VOICE uses to regain what they paid for it, and to be able to support PMMail, and other OS/2 projects, as well as provide a bonus for members (who paid for the source in the first place). In other words, PMMail is a commercial product, that is for sale to those who support OS/2 by being a member of OS2VOICE.

I would note, that this is one of the few ways that users can financially support OS/2, and you may see a similar license, if OS2VOICE does the same thing with another program (not currently planned, AFAIK). I will mention again, that this was the only way to obtain the source for PMMail, and the source came with restrictions that prohibit making it open source, or porting it to other platforms. If OS2VOICE had not done that, PMMail 2.x would still be as usable as it has ever been (which is becoming less, and less, as new server features show up, not to mention that it could no longer be purchased), however OS2VOICE has added performance, reliability, and features to support new servers. It is well worth the cost (even if you do need to buy a membership), and you should remember that  the old PMMail was also a "pay for it", closed source, program. So nothing has changed, except who gets the money, and where that money ends up.

Is it "perfect"? Of course not. You cannot make that many changes, to fix things, without breaking things along the way. At least they usually get fixed, when the problem is identified, reported, and possible to fix. There are a number of problems still outstanding, waiting for a couple of major updates, that haven't got to the top of the list yet. Again, we see time, and personnel, restrictions on what can be done.

Fr4nk:
I know Doug - that is exactly what I said (or at least meant - maybe my english is too bad). I know very good how this license works. The membership bundle is a decision by VOICE - and it sucks!

There is no reason to sell PMMail with a club membership. It could be sold by VOICE without a membership just like any other commercial software.

Maybe you got me wrong. I have no problem with commercial software. I would buy it but I wont apply to a club to get an email application. My loss like you said. I think this needs no further discussion.

Martin Iturbide:
I don't disagree that there is good close source software. But I prefer open source software because:
1) When the main developer goes out of business, anybody that cares can continue the development.
2) When the main developer quits the product and move to other direction, anybody that cares can continue the development.
3) When the main developer passes away, anybody that cares can continue the development.
4) When the main developer goes crazy and tries to lead to you to a wrong direcction, anybody can fork the project and continue in other direction.
5) When the main developer don't want to do an improvement, anybody that cares can collaborate can help to improve the project.

....and with all that possibilities, you can also make money (check out how RedHat had made money with Linux and is GNU GPL and open source) but you had to switch from selling licenses to offer services/support.

Open source reduces the risk and helps to maintain the continuity of the platform. Sure, we need developers, but open source is the legal path that helps developers to create derivative works.


--- Quote from: Fr4nk on January 22, 2014, 08:19:05 pm ---Or just the good old PUBLIC DOMAIN.

--- End quote ---

I like public domain, but remember that this license means that any derivative work can be open source or close source, plus you do not necessary give credits to the original author.  On very liberal cases I also like the BSD 3 Clauses which gives credit to the authors, it gives no responsibility to malfunction (AS IS) and easy to read.

Corporations like Apache or the eclipse licenses one that allows to create derivative works as close source, so they can give you a basic core as open source, and a full product as close source.

But I started to like the GNU GPL which is a copyleft license. It forces the developer of any derivative works to make the source code under the same conditions (GNU GPL). At the end that is what allowed Linux to snowball and keep growing.  If your focus is the community, ensure that the software will be open in the future, and don't care about future corporative benefits,  GNU GPL is a good choice.

But I'm ok with any OSI approved license.

Martin Iturbide:
..and focusing in my crazy idea to start cloning OS/2 from "Top to Down", over eCS or Warp 4.52,  I think we need to evolve this three projects to turn it into full replacements.

1) Presentation Manager Clone - FreePM - BSD License
2) System Object Model (SOM) - SOMFree - GNU GPL and LGPL V3
3) Workplace Shell  - XWorkplace - GNU GPL V2 and other WPS software

Sadly, none of this projects are active enough to evolve into a complete replacement, but at least they will work a the base to walk on this direction.

Today I also found out that there is an initiative in KickStarter to create a cloud "distro" of ReactOS. I'm just amazed to see how ReactOS has cloned Windows 32bits, anybody may complain that it is not perfect clone, but you had to acknowledge how far they have reached being a community without a strong technology sponsor.

Dave Yeo:

--- Quote from: Fr4nk on January 22, 2014, 08:19:05 pm ---
Or just the good old PUBLIC DOMAIN.

--- End quote ---

The problems with Public Domain are that some countries do not allow licencing as public domain and there has been cases of organizations copyrighting public domain stuff and closing it. To a lesser degree there has also been problems with people re-licencing BSD stuff as GPL and restricting the active branch.
One thing about licences such as BSD, it's great if you want something to be a standard. Examples include the TCP/IP stack which allowed the Internet to flourish and zlib where compression is standardized across platforms.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version