[ANN] Smalltalk Labs Browser for blogs

>
> Hi,
>
> I released the first public version of "Smalltalk Labs Browser for blogs"
> (or just SLBfb since that name is really long.. ^^), a JavaScript widget
> that you can put on your blog (or any other kind of website) to offer your
> readers a web based Smalltalk code browser for classes you mention or even
> describe in an article or tutorial so that people don't need to have a
> Smalltalk image at hand to understand what you're talking about. The widget
> pops up when someone clicks on a classname and can be moved freely around a
> website, but it tries to position itself automatically in the best position
> when you don't move it by yourself and keeps doing so even when the web
> browser is resized.
>
> The widget downloads the source code of a class from a database over the
> net. At the moment the database has all 3093 classes of Pharo 1.1 in it and
> more Smalltalks (where code redistribution is allowed) are going to come
> soon, including some popular frameworks and libraries like Seaside. The only
> requirement to add this to a blog is that you can add custom JavaScript to
> your blog's template, you don't need a blog that runs on Smalltalk/Seaside
> for this, which means most free blog services work fine (including Tumblr
> and Blogger).
>
> I hope this will be of help to the Smalltalk community. It's completely free
> and Open Source, licensed under the thoroughly permissive Apache License
> Version 2.0 (both the widget and the database/website). I'm running this on
> Google App Engine and the free quota (bandwidth, database space, CPU time,
> etc.) should be enough to serve the whole Smalltalk community, or at least
> that's the idea.
>
> You can try it out directly on the SLBfb website:
> http://slbrowserfb.appspot.com or in my blog post about the release:
> http://smalltalklabs.tumblr.com/post/1557829586/smalltalk-labs-browser-for-blogs-released
>
> If you scroll to the very bottom of the website, there's a link
> "configuration" which will bring you to the interactive installation
> documentation to install this on your own blog/website.
>
> Keep in mind that this is the first release (apart from the pre-release on
> Pharocasts some time ago), so there could be some nasty bugs that only
> happen when there's a full moon and someone tries to sing a ballad on one
> leg with his arms tied behind his back. This only works in WebKit and
> Mozilla browsers at the moment, but for unsupported browsers or when you
> read a blog post that makes use of SLBfb in an RSS reader or on Planet
> Smalltalk/Squeak, a website is used to display the classes mentioned
> instead, so it still works but not as nicely.
>
> If someone wants to hack on the code, I'll release a screencast about how to
> set up a local development environment some time next week, including a
> small introduction on using the git version control system since the code is
> hosted on Github.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN-Smalltalk-Labs-Browser-for-blogs-tp3041451p3041451.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-users

> For example, in Germany where I come from it is not allowed to
> disclaim liability, but the MIT license does that. Limiting the liability is
> allowed, the Apache license does that. Since this is also a website/server
> and not only a "local", "client side" application, the license being
> actually applicable to keep me from being sued becomes much more important.
> The chances are very slim that someone sues a tiny project like this but why
> make it easier for anyone, there are tons of law firms who's whole business
> model is suing people over unlawful license terms on websites (it's
> outrageous that doing this is actually legal).
>
> Here's an interesting article from Google on open source licenses:
> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2008/05/standing-against-license-proliferation.html
> and an interview:
> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/google-says-no-to-license-proliferation/192
>
> So to sum it up, I'm certainly open for discussion on this but I'd rather
> not change the license unless it's really necessary (e.g. No one wants to
> use it otherwise). It's not that I don't like the MIT license, it's my
> favorite license, it's so short and easy to understand, I am using it for
> Smalltalk Labs Browser (without the "for blogs" ^^) and used it many times
> before, but it really does look like choosing the Apache License for future
> projects is the right thing to do.

> What good is a license if it's not
> applicable anyhow?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>> would you mind to put the license MIT so that it is the same with Squeak
>> and Pharo?
>>
>> Stef
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN-Smalltalk-Labs-Browser-for-blogs-tp3041451p3041742.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-users

>
> Hi,
>
> I released the first public version of "Smalltalk Labs Browser for blogs"
> (or just SLBfb since that name is really long.. ^^), a JavaScript widget
> that you can put on your blog (or any other kind of website) to offer your
> readers a web based Smalltalk code browser for classes you mention or even
> describe in an article or tutorial so that people don't need to have a
> Smalltalk image at hand to understand what you're talking about. The widget
> pops up when someone clicks on a classname and can be moved freely around a
> website, but it tries to position itself automatically in the best position
> when you don't move it by yourself and keeps doing so even when the web
> browser is resized.

>
> Hi Stéphane,
>
> If it should really be a problem for people I can certainly change the
> license, at least for the client since the server uses Apache licensed code
> from Google already and then it would have two licenses which would make
> things unnecessarily complicated. The server is a rather small part though,
> I wrote the first version in about 5 minutes and the version that is in use
> now in about fifteen (not including the website, I spent way more time
> writing text than coding).
>
> Pharo / Squeak aren't completely MIT though, they use the same Apache
> License as I do for SLBfb so I didn't think it would be a problem. Is it
> planned to completely replace the Apache code from Pharo with MIT code over
> time?
>
> Here's why I chose the Apache License (without giving any legal advice or
> guaranteeing that my understanding of the terms are correct, mind you!):
>
> It's more popular than the MIT license by a few orders of magnitude. I
> didn't want to believe this myself since I know way more MIT licensed
> software than Apache Software, but to be fair, who reads licenses unless he
> really has to. 25% of projects on Google Code Project hosting were Apache in
> 2008, only about 8% MIT according to Google.
>
> It's pretty much the same as the MIT license, safe for a few convenient
> additional clauses, like saying that if a contributor contributes code to
> the project it is assumed that his contribution is under the Apache License
> unless he explicitly states otherwise. This can greatly help to prevent
> misunderstandings. The really big difference is that it's actually written
> with modern copyright law in mind, which is one of the reasons it's so much
> longer than the MIT license. The MIT license might very well not be a valid
> license. For example, in Germany where I come from it is not allowed to
> disclaim liability, but the MIT license does that. Limiting the liability is
> allowed, the Apache license does that. Since this is also a website/server
> and not only a "local", "client side" application, the license being
> actually applicable to keep me from being sued becomes much more important.
> The chances are very slim that someone sues a tiny project like this but why
> make it easier for anyone, there are tons of law firms who's whole business
> model is suing people over unlawful license terms on websites (it's
> outrageous that doing this is actually legal).
>
> Here's an interesting article from Google on open source licenses:
> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2008/05/standing-against-license-proliferation.html
> and an interview:
> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/google-says-no-to-license-proliferation/192
>
> So to sum it up, I'm certainly open for discussion on this but I'd rather
> not change the license unless it's really necessary (e.g. No one wants to
> use it otherwise). It's not that I don't like the MIT license, it's my
> favorite license, it's so short and easy to understand, I am using it for
> Smalltalk Labs Browser (without the "for blogs" ^^) and used it many times
> before, but it really does look like choosing the Apache License for future
> projects is the right thing to do. What good is a license if it's not
> applicable anyhow?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>> would you mind to put the license MIT so that it is the same with Squeak
>> and Pharo?
>>
>> Stef
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN-Smalltalk-Labs-Browser-for-blogs-tp3041451p3041742.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-users