It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber… But it is not Amber!

> Dear Nico,
>
> As you wrote to my personal email and c.c. to places where I am not subscribed,
> please c.c. my response (total or partially) to that places to make the point clear
> to persons that can read your asumptions about S8.
>
> I am continuosly making presentations (real and virtual meetings) about
> S8 (the project), the objetives and also "why we are doing what we are doing"
> using the current implementation just now. [*]
> S8, as an implementation, are resources we have to make a step in our objetives
> at Smalltalking (the Smalltalking objetives are stated in http://www.smalltalking.net
> web site as "Un emprendimiento para el estudio de Ambientes de Objetos Virtuales")
> and we have been working with the same objetives from year 2001 (and I
> personally have been working more than a decade before the fundation
> of the association, at diferent levels, not only "writing code";) but also
> on design of concepts behind de use of virtual objects in syntetic ambiences,
> high perfomance execution environments -for smalltalk-, presentations about
> what "is" an OA and how it affects/change people, etc...)
>
> I feel you consider only the code of S8 trying to understand what we
> are doing; without enough information about us.
> It is something frequently observed here, most people interested
> in "the code" (there is a lot to read today in the age of open sources)
> but it is wrong to try to infer history from code/snapshot.
> The use of open systems can help to learn that objects are much more
> than code, specifications and tools; but it require that the smalltalker
> leave the habbits of thinking in smalltalk as a language (and
> written code or it's contents).
>
> On your first paragraph:
>> After looking at S8 [1], it's clear that it's a fork of Amber
>> [2]. While this is perfectly fine as Amber is released under MIT, I
>> really don't like the statements on the website about the license and
>> origin of the project [3].
>
> (wrong) there was a time when I wanted to make S8 implementation
> as much as possible compatible with jTalk, and adapted most of my code
> to jTalk implementation and semantics. But a short time after that I leaved
> that conformace restrictions (because I did not saw much development in
> jTalk, and saw modifications going on a way I don´t wanted
> to follow). I've wrote that in a personal email long time ago.
>
> S8 code can be considered a fork of jTalk, the same way as it can be
> considered a fork of other works (it contain source code from multiple
> open sources as stated in the license, present in each generated image).
> It is ok for me if people want to consider S8 a fork of one or other
> work, and also add lines to more origins in their copies of the code.
> I am not personally interested in code, credits nor written words.
> I am interested in always evolving systems (running
> in computer media and/or minds) and sharing experiences
> with people in motion (more than "one" history).
>
> On lincese terms... it is Smalltalk... and, as usual...
>
> The license terms of a S8 image can be read evaluating
> the following expression in a workspace:
>
>   Smalltalk current licenseTerms
>
> it returns aString with the license terms
> in the environment it is currently running (it can change according to
> loaded frameworks at moment of evaluation)
> e.g. if you point your  chrome browser to
> http://u8.smalltalking.net/profile/aleReimondo/239/index.html
> you can open a workspace and evaluate the code to check license
> under that conditions/time of execution.
>
> In case of running a S8 image in .net environment, that binds
> to .Net core frameworks running heterogeneous VM architecture,
> e.g. S8 for servers running IIS hosted sites
> you can see that #licenseTerms return aString including
> other "origins".
> It can also be the case for systems running on Android devices
> including frameworks to access native resources/services and/or
> browser applications doing computer vision tasks with frameworks
> I have written for that kind of applications.
>
> To try to understand the situation please consider that you made
> wrong asumptions on the reference [3] in your text.
> ---your refs---
> "the project [3]" -> http://u8.smalltalking.net/
> ------------------
>
> U8 is not a project. It is a service, for social development
> using Smalltalk. A service given free by Smalltalking
> association to promote the use of smalltalk under the
> guides of our formulation about OA (popular in our region).
>
> There is not enough public information in written form
> about S8 project; it is something I use to do (to do not write
> papers :-) because I prefer to talk personally to produce
> more impact in people interested in OA; than to reach
> masses (e.g. exploit the marginal power of smalltalk).
> Sorry for that, I know it is the cause of confusion about
> other ways of working with smalltalk and also about most
> of the works I've made with my smalltalks :-)
>
> [*] I will make a presentation about S8 in a few days at STIC2003 ( http://www.stic.st/ )
> and it will be a good place to see more about S8 than reading the code :-)
> I will also try to make presentations in Europe this year, so we can meet
> to talk about our objetives and what we are doing with S8;
> and what we have done with Smalltalk to people in
> the last decades.
> I know that the differences and impressions we have on each other
> will resolve with patience, time and talking about what we want to do
> when we are on a keyboard :-)
>
> all the best,
> Ale.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas Petton" <[hidden email]>
> To: "esug-list" <[hidden email]>; "Amber ML" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 10:15 AM
> Subject: It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber. But it is not Amber!
>
>
>

> Nicolas,
>
> At the time I adapted my works to jTalk, Amber did not exist.
> The last snapshot of Jtalk I have downloaded was
> sept,27 2011 (date taken from my backups, and it was downloaded
> for update of dev. repository, not to use in S8 at that time).
> I will copy the exact lines present in jtalk license file to make
> it exact (hope tomorrow will be online).
> If I put Amber as origin, it will be honored people not
> related/responsible to the sources.
>
>> If you could only clearly state on your website that s8
>> is based on Amber (formerly known as Jtalk)
>
> It is not "based on Amber", Amber was not published
> at the time I read the code.
>
>> with a link and the license,
>> it would completely solve the issue.
>
> Will edit our license including exact lines of jtalk's
> LICENSE  file.
>
>> Getting the license file is currently almost impossible
>> unless you really know where to find it, and I don't think
>> that's good enough, sorry.
>
> It is easy; press the "License terms" link present at any
> contribution page or evaluate
> the expression (with objects, evaluating is as easy
> as navigating files) in any image running S8.
>
>> Your work is based on Amber, and Amber is under MIT,
>> all I require from you is
>> to respect the copyright and put it **somewhere visible**.
>
>> What you're saying is obviously not true. I read a good part of
>> S8 as it is online today, and I can assure that it's not just "as
>> compatible as possible" with Amber, it **is based on**
>> Amber with modifications and additions to it.
>
> I think you have not read a good part; and you are
> interested in promoting your actual product Amber.
> S8 has today a lot of frameworks -more than 40 at U8 site,
> and +300 contribution pages; more than 16mb of .st files-
> running on diferent platforms/devices.
>
> The point here is that I can't help you saying that S8 is based
> on Amber; because it is based in a number of sources but
> not Amber.
>
>> I can even tell you that s8 is based on a version of Amber that's
>> at around 2 years old. I recognize the code without any doubt,
>> and can point you to links if that's required (but I do hope that
>> this will not be needed).
>
> Please review your links.
> It is similarity to Jtalk code what you find familiar.
>
>> I could even point you to issues that S8 does have today
>> as they were resolved in Amber during its development over
>> the last 2 years.
>
> Don't want to have a longer license string. :-P
> Anyone finding an issue can solve it changing his/her
> code base, and adding license lines to reference origins.
>
>> I do not care about philosophical matters here, what matters to me
>> here is being fair play. I do not try to understand what you are
>> doing. I'm just seeing Amber code being used. That's all.
>
> Ok, please go to your records and check the dates.
> I have no downloads of Amber, so I can't check if it has
> more diference to Jtalk than we can find for S8.
> What I can say is that S8 is not a kernel, it is a lot of
> COMPLETE frameworks to implement real apps
> with smalltalk running multiple devices and platforms.
> It is not something to read in a day.
>
>> Please don't get me wrong, I don't want by any mean to be rude. All I
>> ask is my work and other Amber contributors' to be respected.
>
>
> Ale.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas Petton" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "esug-list" <[hidden email]>; "Amber ML" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 1:34 PM
> Subject: Re: It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber. But it is not Amber!
>
>
> Hi Ale,
>
> Thanks for getting back to me. I'm keeping the entire contents of your
> response as you asked.
>
> If you could only clearly state on your website that s8 is based
> on Amber (formerly known as Jtalk) with a link and the license,
> it would completely solve the issue. Getting the license file is
> currently almost impossible unless you really know where to find
> it, and I don't think that's good enough, sorry. Your work is
> based on Amber, and Amber is under MIT, all I require from you is
> to respect the copyright and put it **somewhere visible**.
>
> What you're saying is obviously not true. I read a good part of
> S8 as it is online today, and I can assure that it's not just "as
> compatible as possible" with Amber, it **is based on** Amber with
> modifications and additions to it.
>
> I can even tell you that s8 is based on a version of Amber that's
> at around 2 years old. I recognize the code without any doubt, and can
> point you to links if that's required (but I do hope that this will
> not be needed). I could even point you to issues that S8 does have today
> as they were resolved in Amber during its development over the last 2
> years.
>
> I do not care about philosophical matters here, what matters to me
> here is being fair play. I do not try to understand what you are
> doing. I'm just seeing Amber code being used. That's all.
>
>
> Please don't get me wrong, I don't want by any mean to be rude. All I
> ask is my work and other Amber contributors' to be respected.
>
> Cheers,
> Nico
>
>
> On May 16, 2013, at 5:31 PM, "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Nico,
>>
>> As you wrote to my personal email and c.c. to places where I am not subscribed,
>> please c.c. my response (total or partially) to that places to make the point clear
>> to persons that can read your asumptions about S8.
>>
>> I am continuosly making presentations (real and virtual meetings) about
>> S8 (the project), the objetives and also "why we are doing what we are doing"
>> using the current implementation just now. [*]
>> S8, as an implementation, are resources we have to make a step in our objetives
>> at Smalltalking (the Smalltalking objetives are stated in http://www.smalltalking.net
>> web site as "Un emprendimiento para el estudio de Ambientes de Objetos Virtuales")
>> and we have been working with the same objetives from year 2001 (and I
>> personally have been working more than a decade before the fundation
>> of the association, at diferent levels, not only "writing code";) but also
>> on design of concepts behind de use of virtual objects in syntetic ambiences,
>> high perfomance execution environments -for smalltalk-, presentations about
>> what "is" an OA and how it affects/change people, etc...)
>>
>> I feel you consider only the code of S8 trying to understand what we
>> are doing; without enough information about us.
>> It is something frequently observed here, most people interested
>> in "the code" (there is a lot to read today in the age of open sources)
>> but it is wrong to try to infer history from code/snapshot.
>> The use of open systems can help to learn that objects are much more
>> than code, specifications and tools; but it require that the smalltalker
>> leave the habbits of thinking in smalltalk as a language (and
>> written code or it's contents).
>>
>> On your first paragraph:
>>> After looking at S8 [1], it's clear that it's a fork of Amber
>>> [2]. While this is perfectly fine as Amber is released under MIT, I
>>> really don't like the statements on the website about the license and
>>> origin of the project [3].
>>
>> (wrong) there was a time when I wanted to make S8 implementation
>> as much as possible compatible with jTalk, and adapted most of my code
>> to jTalk implementation and semantics. But a short time after that I leaved
>> that conformace restrictions (because I did not saw much development in
>> jTalk, and saw modifications going on a way I don´t wanted
>> to follow). I've wrote that in a personal email long time ago.
>>
>> S8 code can be considered a fork of jTalk, the same way as it can be
>> considered a fork of other works (it contain source code from multiple
>> open sources as stated in the license, present in each generated image).
>> It is ok for me if people want to consider S8 a fork of one or other
>> work, and also add lines to more origins in their copies of the code.
>> I am not personally interested in code, credits nor written words.
>> I am interested in always evolving systems (running
>> in computer media and/or minds) and sharing experiences
>> with people in motion (more than "one" history).
>>
>> On lincese terms... it is Smalltalk... and, as usual...
>>
>> The license terms of a S8 image can be read evaluating
>> the following expression in a workspace:
>>
>>  Smalltalk current licenseTerms
>>
>> it returns aString with the license terms
>> in the environment it is currently running (it can change according to
>> loaded frameworks at moment of evaluation)
>> e.g. if you point your  chrome browser to
>> http://u8.smalltalking.net/profile/aleReimondo/239/index.html
>> you can open a workspace and evaluate the code to check license
>> under that conditions/time of execution.
>>
>> In case of running a S8 image in .net environment, that binds
>> to .Net core frameworks running heterogeneous VM architecture,
>> e.g. S8 for servers running IIS hosted sites
>> you can see that #licenseTerms return aString including
>> other "origins".
>> It can also be the case for systems running on Android devices
>> including frameworks to access native resources/services and/or
>> browser applications doing computer vision tasks with frameworks
>> I have written for that kind of applications.
>>
>> To try to understand the situation please consider that you made
>> wrong asumptions on the reference [3] in your text.
>> ---your refs---
>> "the project [3]" -> http://u8.smalltalking.net/
>> ------------------
>>
>> U8 is not a project. It is a service, for social development
>> using Smalltalk. A service given free by Smalltalking
>> association to promote the use of smalltalk under the
>> guides of our formulation about OA (popular in our region).
>>
>> There is not enough public information in written form
>> about S8 project; it is something I use to do (to do not write
>> papers :-) because I prefer to talk personally to produce
>> more impact in people interested in OA; than to reach
>> masses (e.g. exploit the marginal power of smalltalk).
>> Sorry for that, I know it is the cause of confusion about
>> other ways of working with smalltalk and also about most
>> of the works I've made with my smalltalks :-)
>>
>> [*] I will make a presentation about S8 in a few days at STIC2003 ( http://www.stic.st/ )
>> and it will be a good place to see more about S8 than reading the code :-)
>> I will also try to make presentations in Europe this year, so we can meet
>> to talk about our objetives and what we are doing with S8;
>> and what we have done with Smalltalk to people in
>> the last decades.
>> I know that the differences and impressions we have on each other
>> will resolve with patience, time and talking about what we want to do
>> when we are on a keyboard :-)
>>
>> all the best,
>> Ale.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas Petton" <[hidden email]>
>> To: "esug-list" <[hidden email]>; "Amber ML" <[hidden email]>
>> Cc: "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 10:15 AM
>> Subject: It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber. But it is not Amber!
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Nicolas Petton
> http://www.nicolas-petton.fr
>
>
>

> Nicolas,
>
> At the time I adapted my works to jTalk, Amber did not exist.
> The last snapshot of Jtalk I have downloaded was
> sept,27 2011 (date taken from my backups, and it was downloaded
> for update of dev. repository, not to use in S8 at that time).
> I will copy the exact lines present in jtalk license file to make
> it exact (hope tomorrow will be online).
> If I put Amber as origin, it will be honored people not
> related/responsible to the sources.
>
>> If you could only clearly state on your website that s8
>> is based on Amber (formerly known as Jtalk)
>
> It is not "based on Amber", Amber was not published
> at the time I read the code.
>
>> with a link and the license,
>> it would completely solve the issue.
>
> Will edit our license including exact lines of jtalk's
> LICENSE  file.
>
>> Getting the license file is currently almost impossible
>> unless you really know where to find it, and I don't think
>> that's good enough, sorry.
>
> It is easy; press the "License terms" link present at any
> contribution page or evaluate
> the expression (with objects, evaluating is as easy
> as navigating files) in any image running S8.
>
>> Your work is based on Amber, and Amber is under MIT,
>> all I require from you is
>> to respect the copyright and put it **somewhere visible**.
>
>> What you're saying is obviously not true. I read a good part of
>> S8 as it is online today, and I can assure that it's not just "as
>> compatible as possible" with Amber, it **is based on**
>> Amber with modifications and additions to it.
>
> I think you have not read a good part; and you are
> interested in promoting your actual product Amber.
> S8 has today a lot of frameworks -more than 40 at U8 site,
> and +300 contribution pages; more than 16mb of .st files-
> running on diferent platforms/devices.
>
> The point here is that I can't help you saying that S8 is based
> on Amber; because it is based in a number of sources but
> not Amber.
>
>> I can even tell you that s8 is based on a version of Amber that's
>> at around 2 years old. I recognize the code without any doubt,
>> and can point you to links if that's required (but I do hope that
>> this will not be needed).
>
> Please review your links.
> It is similarity to Jtalk code what you find familiar.
>
>> I could even point you to issues that S8 does have today
>> as they were resolved in Amber during its development over
>> the last 2 years.
>
> Don't want to have a longer license string. :-P
> Anyone finding an issue can solve it changing his/her
> code base, and adding license lines to reference origins.
>
>> I do not care about philosophical matters here, what matters to me
>> here is being fair play. I do not try to understand what you are
>> doing. I'm just seeing Amber code being used. That's all.
>
> Ok, please go to your records and check the dates.
> I have no downloads of Amber, so I can't check if it has
> more diference to Jtalk than we can find for S8.
> What I can say is that S8 is not a kernel, it is a lot of
> COMPLETE frameworks to implement real apps
> with smalltalk running multiple devices and platforms.
> It is not something to read in a day.
>
>> Please don't get me wrong, I don't want by any mean to be rude. All I
>> ask is my work and other Amber contributors' to be respected.
>
>
> Ale.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas Petton" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "esug-list" <[hidden email]>; "Amber ML" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 1:34 PM
> Subject: Re: It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber. But it is not Amber!
>
>
> Hi Ale,
>
> Thanks for getting back to me. I'm keeping the entire contents of your
> response as you asked.
>
> If you could only clearly state on your website that s8 is based
> on Amber (formerly known as Jtalk) with a link and the license,
> it would completely solve the issue. Getting the license file is
> currently almost impossible unless you really know where to find
> it, and I don't think that's good enough, sorry. Your work is
> based on Amber, and Amber is under MIT, all I require from you is
> to respect the copyright and put it **somewhere visible**.
>
> What you're saying is obviously not true. I read a good part of
> S8 as it is online today, and I can assure that it's not just "as
> compatible as possible" with Amber, it **is based on** Amber with
> modifications and additions to it.
>
> I can even tell you that s8 is based on a version of Amber that's
> at around 2 years old. I recognize the code without any doubt, and can
> point you to links if that's required (but I do hope that this will
> not be needed). I could even point you to issues that S8 does have today
> as they were resolved in Amber during its development over the last 2
> years.
>
> I do not care about philosophical matters here, what matters to me
> here is being fair play. I do not try to understand what you are
> doing. I'm just seeing Amber code being used. That's all.
>
>
> Please don't get me wrong, I don't want by any mean to be rude. All I
> ask is my work and other Amber contributors' to be respected.
>
> Cheers,
> Nico
>
>
> On May 16, 2013, at 5:31 PM, "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Nico,
>>
>> As you wrote to my personal email and c.c. to places where I am not subscribed,
>> please c.c. my response (total or partially) to that places to make the point clear
>> to persons that can read your asumptions about S8.
>>
>> I am continuosly making presentations (real and virtual meetings) about
>> S8 (the project), the objetives and also "why we are doing what we are doing"
>> using the current implementation just now. [*]
>> S8, as an implementation, are resources we have to make a step in our objetives
>> at Smalltalking (the Smalltalking objetives are stated in http://www.smalltalking.net
>> web site as "Un emprendimiento para el estudio de Ambientes de Objetos Virtuales")
>> and we have been working with the same objetives from year 2001 (and I
>> personally have been working more than a decade before the fundation
>> of the association, at diferent levels, not only "writing code";) but also
>> on design of concepts behind de use of virtual objects in syntetic ambiences,
>> high perfomance execution environments -for smalltalk-, presentations about
>> what "is" an OA and how it affects/change people, etc...)
>>
>> I feel you consider only the code of S8 trying to understand what we
>> are doing; without enough information about us.
>> It is something frequently observed here, most people interested
>> in "the code" (there is a lot to read today in the age of open sources)
>> but it is wrong to try to infer history from code/snapshot.
>> The use of open systems can help to learn that objects are much more
>> than code, specifications and tools; but it require that the smalltalker
>> leave the habbits of thinking in smalltalk as a language (and
>> written code or it's contents).
>>
>> On your first paragraph:
>>> After looking at S8 [1], it's clear that it's a fork of Amber
>>> [2]. While this is perfectly fine as Amber is released under MIT, I
>>> really don't like the statements on the website about the license and
>>> origin of the project [3].
>>
>> (wrong) there was a time when I wanted to make S8 implementation
>> as much as possible compatible with jTalk, and adapted most of my code
>> to jTalk implementation and semantics. But a short time after that I leaved
>> that conformace restrictions (because I did not saw much development in
>> jTalk, and saw modifications going on a way I don´t wanted
>> to follow). I've wrote that in a personal email long time ago.
>>
>> S8 code can be considered a fork of jTalk, the same way as it can be
>> considered a fork of other works (it contain source code from multiple
>> open sources as stated in the license, present in each generated image).
>> It is ok for me if people want to consider S8 a fork of one or other
>> work, and also add lines to more origins in their copies of the code.
>> I am not personally interested in code, credits nor written words.
>> I am interested in always evolving systems (running
>> in computer media and/or minds) and sharing experiences
>> with people in motion (more than "one" history).
>>
>> On lincese terms... it is Smalltalk... and, as usual...
>>
>> The license terms of a S8 image can be read evaluating
>> the following expression in a workspace:
>>
>>  Smalltalk current licenseTerms
>>
>> it returns aString with the license terms
>> in the environment it is currently running (it can change according to
>> loaded frameworks at moment of evaluation)
>> e.g. if you point your  chrome browser to
>> http://u8.smalltalking.net/profile/aleReimondo/239/index.html
>> you can open a workspace and evaluate the code to check license
>> under that conditions/time of execution.
>>
>> In case of running a S8 image in .net environment, that binds
>> to .Net core frameworks running heterogeneous VM architecture,
>> e.g. S8 for servers running IIS hosted sites
>> you can see that #licenseTerms return aString including
>> other "origins".
>> It can also be the case for systems running on Android devices
>> including frameworks to access native resources/services and/or
>> browser applications doing computer vision tasks with frameworks
>> I have written for that kind of applications.
>>
>> To try to understand the situation please consider that you made
>> wrong asumptions on the reference [3] in your text.
>> ---your refs---
>> "the project [3]" -> http://u8.smalltalking.net/
>> ------------------
>>
>> U8 is not a project. It is a service, for social development
>> using Smalltalk. A service given free by Smalltalking
>> association to promote the use of smalltalk under the
>> guides of our formulation about OA (popular in our region).
>>
>> There is not enough public information in written form
>> about S8 project; it is something I use to do (to do not write
>> papers :-) because I prefer to talk personally to produce
>> more impact in people interested in OA; than to reach
>> masses (e.g. exploit the marginal power of smalltalk).
>> Sorry for that, I know it is the cause of confusion about
>> other ways of working with smalltalk and also about most
>> of the works I've made with my smalltalks :-)
>>
>> [*] I will make a presentation about S8 in a few days at STIC2003 ( http://www.stic.st/ )
>> and it will be a good place to see more about S8 than reading the code :-)
>> I will also try to make presentations in Europe this year, so we can meet
>> to talk about our objetives and what we are doing with S8;
>> and what we have done with Smalltalk to people in
>> the last decades.
>> I know that the differences and impressions we have on each other
>> will resolve with patience, time and talking about what we want to do
>> when we are on a keyboard :-)
>>
>> all the best,
>> Ale.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas Petton" <[hidden email]>
>> To: "esug-list" <[hidden email]>; "Amber ML" <[hidden email]>
>> Cc: "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 10:15 AM
>> Subject: It looks like Amber, it smells like Amber. But it is not Amber!
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Nicolas Petton
> http://www.nicolas-petton.fr
>
>
>