Re: [Unicode] Class Unicode --> data from unicode.org
Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes
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.
> Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes
> 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.
"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."
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.
> 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.
> On 7 December 2015 at 11:22, EuanM <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Gnu-Smalltalk also has the classes
>> 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: [Pharo-dev] [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.
> Excerpts from Martin Bähr's message of 2015-12-07 16:17:28 +0100:
>> randal schwartz suggests a cleanroom approach, though i personally think
>> is overkill. if a cleanroom approach were really necessary than i would
>> be allowed to switch jobs because once i have been working on one
>> 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
>> classes under the MIT license, or they will need to be rewritten from
>> i would suggest asking them in the name of having a common code-base for
> 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
> chief engineer
> pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net
> foresight developer foresightlinux.org
> unix sysadmin
> Martin Bähr working in china
> http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/ >