That article that I linked in our email exchange convince you to not license under a non-commercial license didn't it?
If so, than I am glad and relieved that my argument work.
If it didn't and you choose the GPL anyway, I am also glad.
If I have money, I'll built a Uzebox myself. Though if you produced Uzeboxes to sell, I'll buy that over making my own. Since I am more interested in making games.
Anyway, thanks a lot! I am grateful that you did this!
Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
I run the Libregamewiki free as in freedom gaming encyclopedia.
I also have a personal game development website.
I also have a personal game development website.
Re: Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
Thanks, my pleasure. Thinking of it, two things effectively convinced me. For one, its the fact that it's almost unenforceable. If some knockoffs were made and sold anyway, I have no time and money to sue them! And more importantly, it would would have perhaps prevented the spread of the Uzebox due to its restriction. I work myself for a big software company that is a heavy open source supporter. Everyday I'm using open source libraries in my own production code.
So it is my contribution to a community from which I have greatly benefited. And I greatly anticipate playing other peoples games on my creation!
Some folks are already making PCBs, some will undoubtedly have some to sell soon, perhaps even kits.
Cheers,
Uze
So it is my contribution to a community from which I have greatly benefited. And I greatly anticipate playing other peoples games on my creation!
Some folks are already making PCBs, some will undoubtedly have some to sell soon, perhaps even kits.
Cheers,
Uze
Re: Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
With the kits I think we could get an even bigger group of people to work on the project.
Compman
Compman
Re: Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
Is there any particular reason that the GPL was chosen for the kernel, rather than the LGPL (or even a more permissive license, such as a BSD license)?
Given the way the GPL is written, it means no one can distribute executables using the kernel code w/o also distributing source to their code under the GPL. (Under the LGPL one could distribute a program using the kernel, but would only have to provide object files which an be linked against updated versions of the kernel, rather than having to distribute the source code. But if they modified the kernel in any way then they'd have to give away their modified kernel source.)
I'm actually ok with the GPL (as I don't plan on writing anything where I wouldn't mind releasing the source) but I can see how some others might not want to give out the source code to all of their projects.
Given the way the GPL is written, it means no one can distribute executables using the kernel code w/o also distributing source to their code under the GPL. (Under the LGPL one could distribute a program using the kernel, but would only have to provide object files which an be linked against updated versions of the kernel, rather than having to distribute the source code. But if they modified the kernel in any way then they'd have to give away their modified kernel source.)
I'm actually ok with the GPL (as I don't plan on writing anything where I wouldn't mind releasing the source) but I can see how some others might not want to give out the source code to all of their projects.
Re: Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
Making derived sources available is a cornerstone of the open source movement. If you benefit from my work, I may want to benefit and learn from yours. Without the sources, I can't quite do that. So for me, in the end, all the contributions and knowledge derived from my work adds up to build much better software. And hardware too, look at Clay Cowgill, AVCore design & improvements!
Personally, if someone doesn't follow the license, I will not run after them and sue their ass off. That said, I don't think it's necessary to ship the sources with your HEX files, but make them available somewhere for others to benefit.
Cheers,
Uze
Personally, if someone doesn't follow the license, I will not run after them and sue their ass off. That said, I don't think it's necessary to ship the sources with your HEX files, but make them available somewhere for others to benefit.
Cheers,
Uze
Re: Thanks for Licensing under the GPL and CC BY-SA
[quote="uze6666"]Making derived sources available is a cornerstone of the open source movement. If you benefit from my work, I may want to benefit and learn from yours. Without the sources, I can't quite do that. So for me, in the end, all the contributions and knowledge derived from my work adds up to build much better software. And hardware too, look at Clay Cowgill, AVCore design & improvements!
[/quote]
ok, that's cool. I just wanted to see whether or not that was your actual intention.. some people slap the GPL on things w/o actually knowing what the license says.
[/quote]
ok, that's cool. I just wanted to see whether or not that was your actual intention.. some people slap the GPL on things w/o actually knowing what the license says.