Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
Locked
 
|
Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes
UnicodeCharacter UnicodeString which I'm having a good look at. On 7 December 2015 at 08:52, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: > there is a class 'Unicode' both in Squeak and Pharo. > > http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6225 > > It surely needs attention as it loads the data from www.unicode.org to > initialize the Unicode knowhow of Squeak / Pharo. |
Re: [squeak-dev] Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
|
Please take a look at the issues around licencing, where GNU Smalltalk
is concerned: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123761.html I'd suggest talking to Paolo Bonzini before continuing. frank On 7 December 2015 at 11:22, EuanM <[hidden email]> wrote: > Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes > > UnicodeCharacter > UnicodeString > > which I'm having a good look at. > > On 7 December 2015 at 08:52, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >> there is a class 'Unicode' both in Squeak and Pharo. >> >> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6225 >> >> It surely needs attention as it loads the data from www.unicode.org to >> initialize the Unicode knowhow of Squeak / Pharo. > |
Re: [squeak-dev] Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
|
|
Indeed, it is important to remember that GNU Smalltalk has an incompatible license with that of Pharo.
Doru > On Dec 7, 2015, at 6:31 AM, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Please take a look at the issues around licencing, where GNU Smalltalk > is concerned: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123761.html > > I'd suggest talking to Paolo Bonzini before continuing. > > frank > > On 7 December 2015 at 11:22, EuanM <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes >> >> UnicodeCharacter >> UnicodeString >> >> which I'm having a good look at. >> >> On 7 December 2015 at 08:52, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> there is a class 'Unicode' both in Squeak and Pharo. >>> >>> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6225 >>> >>> It surely needs attention as it loads the data from www.unicode.org to >>> initialize the Unicode knowhow of Squeak / Pharo. >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com "In a world where everything is moving ever faster, one might have better chances to win by moving slower." |
Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
|
|
In reply to this post by EuanM
EuanM <[hidden email]> writes:
> Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes > > UnicodeCharacter > UnicodeString > > which I'm having a good look at. pay attention to license issues. AFAIK, Gnu-Smalltalk is under the GPL whereas Pharo is MIT. You may not even get inspired by GPL code to write MIT code. But I'm not a lawyer, I may be wrong. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill |
|
|
In reply to this post by Frank Shearar-3
Thanks for the heads up - I'll be sure o stay out of their code and
only work with Gnu0-Smalltalk to the extent that we can polyfilla over them. I'll contact Paolo, although his last statement pointed to: http://smalltalk.gnu.org/faq/32 "Does copyright restrict the use of GNU Smalltalk? By Paolo Bonzini - Posted on June 20th, 2007 It does, but in general you don't need to worry much about the licensing of your Smalltalk programs. The class library is licensed under the GNU LGPL. Thus, it permits using the library together with non-free programs. The virtual machine and the bindings to external libraries are licensed under the GNU GPL, with a special exception that allows Smalltalk programs to be linked with the functions exported by the virtual machine and said bindings." and "whatever happens Smalltalk programs are clear and only covered by the GPL." (http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123790.html) The LGPL states "You may convey a Combined Work [i.e. a work containing both LGPL'd source code and non-LGPL's source code] under ***terms of your choice*** that, taken together, effectively do not restrict modification of the portions of the [LGPL'd code] contained in the Combined Work". If we use LGPL'd Smalltalk from Gnu-Smalltalk, we may not close the LGPL'd portion of the code. Was anyone planning on closing the Unicode parts of Cuis/Pharo/Squeak? It *is* an issue with Dolphin's .exe facility, which is one of my own personal use-cases. But for Pharo/Squeak/Cuis it seems to be a non-issue. If anyone has concrete evidence to the contrary, please raise it now. (IANAL but I can read contracts and do risk management of legal issues). If anyone continues to have long-term concerns, let me know. I can get some qualified legal opinions. Tbh, very little of my work is done in the USA's legal jurisdiction. My own risk is low. On 7 December 2015 at 11:31, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote: > Please take a look at the issues around licencing, where GNU Smalltalk > is concerned: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123761.html > > I'd suggest talking to Paolo Bonzini before continuing. > > frank > > On 7 December 2015 at 11:22, EuanM <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes >> >> UnicodeCharacter >> UnicodeString >> >> which I'm having a good look at. >> >> On 7 December 2015 at 08:52, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> there is a class 'Unicode' both in Squeak and Pharo. >>> >>> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6225 >>> >>> It surely needs attention as it loads the data from www.unicode.org to >>> initialize the Unicode knowhow of Squeak / Pharo. >> > |
Re: [squeak-dev] Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
|
|
As the issue is about potential reuse of GNU Smalltalk code snippets /
classes regarding Unicode the most straightforward thing is to ask Paolo Bonzini (http://smalltalk.gnu.org/blog/bonzinip) if he permits the reuse under an MIT license. So far no code has been identified which would be needed under an MIT license. HTH Hannes On 12/7/15, Martin Bähr <[hidden email]> wrote: > Excerpts from Martin Bähr's message of 2015-12-07 16:17:28 +0100: >> randal schwartz suggests a cleanroom approach, though i personally think >> that >> is overkill. if a cleanroom approach were really necessary than i would >> never >> be allowed to switch jobs because once i have been working on one >> companys >> private code i would be tainted for life, as i could accidentally >> reproduce the >> same code in my next job. >> >> however, either you get the GNU-smalltalk authors to relicense their >> unicode >> classes under the MIT license, or they will need to be rewritten from >> scratch. >> >> i would suggest asking them in the name of having a common code-base for >> all >> smalltalks. > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123817.html > is worth reading in that context: > > So it's mainly an issue of being willing to cooperate. I think all GNU > Smalltalk people (almost all?) are and it's also true at least for some > Squeak people. If somebody took a package (several thousands lines of > code, etc.) wholesale, ported it to Squeak, and licensed it under MIT on > SqueakMap that would be copyright violation. But everything can be done > "cum grano salis". Nobody is going to sue you if you copy an interface > from GNU Smalltalk, reimplement in Squeak (for fun!), but you did look > at the method comments in GNU Smalltalk -- and OMG maybe you got a > glimpse of the source code just below! Copyright does not protect > having similar implementations. > > I think we're all for interoperability and for exchange of opinions > within the communities. > > so there you have the open invitation to go and ask... > > and read this > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123838.html > for a good summary on the issue. > > greetings, martin. > > -- > eKita - the online platform for your entire academic > life > -- > chief engineer > eKita.co > pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net > societyserver.org > secretary > beijinglug.org > mentor > fossasia.org > foresight developer foresightlinux.org > realss.com > unix sysadmin > Martin Bähr working in china > http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/ > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by EuanM
Yes, clean room approaches are overkill.
Obviousness in code has long been found to be a protection against copyright. For instance, you cannot copyright a programme in BASIC that says 10 Print "Hello World" 20 GOTO 10 (And by copyright, I mean prevent anyone else in the world from typing that programme and distributing their copy). One of the great advantage of writing weird, convoluted or just plain dense clever code is that it becomes non-obvious and therefore indubitably covered under copyright. The mere fact that code has been written somewhere, does *not* make it unusable elsewhere. (As an aside, I tend to write plain, straightforward code. Asserting copyright on a lot of it would be hard). One of the great advantages of not doing my coding in the USA is that Stallman would have to come after me in my jurisdiction, not his. Probably a special case of security through obscurity. Usual disclaimer. IANAL. Just interested in these issues from having developed legal support systems (including litigation support systems). As Hannes says, we haven't hit an area of the project where it is an issue yet. But personally, I'm quite relaxed about looking at the Gnu Smalltalk codebase. I'm pretty certain I can re-implement without violating copyright. In the same way I can précis and paraphrase a short story without violating the copyright of the short story. Can any of you tell me the story of Hansel and Gretel without violating the copyright of some recently published re-telling of the tale? I'm pretty certain you could. Please remember that it is much easier to avoid copyright violation than it is to avoid patent violation, in these sorts of cases. None of the Gnu Smalltalk base is patented. Cheers, Euan (back to reading the ICU) On 7 December 2015 at 16:06, Martin Bähr <[hidden email]> wrote: > Excerpts from Martin Bähr's message of 2015-12-07 16:17:28 +0100: >> randal schwartz suggests a cleanroom approach, though i personally think that >> is overkill. if a cleanroom approach were really necessary than i would never >> be allowed to switch jobs because once i have been working on one companys >> private code i would be tainted for life, as i could accidentally reproduce the >> same code in my next job. >> >> however, either you get the GNU-smalltalk authors to relicense their unicode >> classes under the MIT license, or they will need to be rewritten from scratch. >> >> i would suggest asking them in the name of having a common code-base for all >> smalltalks. > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123817.html > is worth reading in that context: > > So it's mainly an issue of being willing to cooperate. I think all GNU > Smalltalk people (almost all?) are and it's also true at least for some > Squeak people. If somebody took a package (several thousands lines of > code, etc.) wholesale, ported it to Squeak, and licensed it under MIT on > SqueakMap that would be copyright violation. But everything can be done > "cum grano salis". Nobody is going to sue you if you copy an interface > from GNU Smalltalk, reimplement in Squeak (for fun!), but you did look > at the method comments in GNU Smalltalk -- and OMG maybe you got a > glimpse of the source code just below! Copyright does not protect > having similar implementations. > > I think we're all for interoperability and for exchange of opinions > within the communities. > > so there you have the open invitation to go and ask... > > and read this > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-January/123838.html > for a good summary on the issue. > > greetings, martin. > > -- > eKita - the online platform for your entire academic life > -- > chief engineer eKita.co > pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net societyserver.org > secretary beijinglug.org > mentor fossasia.org > foresight developer foresightlinux.org realss.com > unix sysadmin > Martin Bähr working in china http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/ |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |