Aspect class redistribution

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Aspect class redistribution

Esteban A. Maringolo-2
Andy, Blair, ¿OA?:

How much "not redistributable" is the Aspect class?

It is considered to be part of the development system, but its usage
goes beyond only inspectors or structure definitions (at least my usage
of it).

I can make my own AttributeDescriptor sub-branch, but having an
EamAspect doesn't have the same "semantical sound" as plain Aspect.

And... probably I'll end duplicating behavior, which could be added to
the existing implementation of Aspect.

Best regards.

--
Eam


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Aspect class redistribution

Andy Bower-3
Esteban,

> Andy, Blair, ¿OA?:
>
> How much "not redistributable" is the Aspect class?
>
> It is considered to be part of the development system, but its usage
> goes beyond only inspectors or structure definitions (at least my
> usage of it).
>
> I can make my own AttributeDescriptor sub-branch, but having an
> EamAspect doesn't have the same "semantical sound" as plain Aspect.
>
> And... probably I'll end duplicating behavior, which could be added
> to the existing implementation of Aspect.

The Aspect class could be made redistributable (i.e. we could give you
special permission to distribute it) but you'll find that it starts to
pull in lots more bits of the development classes that each aspect
needs to display itself. This will make image stripping much less
effective when deploying your application.

The point about the license is that we want to prevent people from
deploying and selling derivative works (i.e. a competing Smalltalk
development system). If you can convince us that this is not what your
application does then we are pretty flexible about what can (and
cannot) be distributed.

--
Andy Bower
Dolphin Support
www.object-arts.com


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Aspect class redistribution

Steve Taylor-4
Andy Bower wrote:

> The point about the license is that we want to prevent people from
> deploying and selling derivative works (i.e. a competing Smalltalk
> development system). If you can convince us that this is not what your
> application does then we are pretty flexible about what can (and
> cannot) be distributed.

I've wondered about the boundaries of that myself. How would you feel
about a game which allowed smalltalk driven scripting as part of the
game - i..e -  one of those games where you program a bunch of robots
and they fight it out in an arena? Would that go over the line?


                         Steve


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Aspect class redistribution

Andy Bower-3
Steve,

> > The point about the license is that we want to prevent people from
> > deploying and selling derivative works (i.e. a competing Smalltalk
> > development system). If you can convince us that this is not what
> > your application does then we are pretty flexible about what can
> > (and cannot) be distributed.
>
> I've wondered about the boundaries of that myself. How would you feel
> about a game which allowed smalltalk driven scripting as part of the
> game - i..e -  one of those games where you program a bunch of robots
> and they fight it out in an arena? Would that go over the line?

I doubt it. I guess it would depend on whether it could be used to do
other Smalltalk programming or whether it was restricted to the robot
simulation. Also, I think we would expect you to implement your own
code editing/browsing tools and packaging tools and not re-use the
existing Dolphin browsers.

--
Andy Bower
Dolphin Support
www.object-arts.com