VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

jameshale
In the referenced thread Monte mentioned something about fmpeg and it associated libraries and licensing.
Today I was notified of an update the VLC and remembered how that is now available on the App Store.
Looking at Videolan's site, VLC is GPL 2.
How is it that it can be distributed under Apple's terms and conditions and still be adhering to its GPL terms and conditions?
Leaving the fact that there is a conflict here the more interesting question to me is why didn't Apple stop it. I know they did pull it when it first came out for iOS and then a second time but it has been back for a while now. I haven't been able to find anything on the Videolan's site to suggest their license has changed so what gives?
Is their wiggle room here for LC community apps to get up on the App Store?

James

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Monte Goulding-2
It appears to be in the store under the Mozilla Pubic License. From a press release:

VLC for iOS is fully open-source. Its code will be available online by tomorrow and is bi-licensed under both the Mozilla Public License Version 2 as well as the GNU General Public License Version 2 or later. The MPLv2 is applicable for distribution on the App Store.
We worked hard with all major copyright holders to not repeat history and we are confident to have achieved this goal.

> On 5 May 2016, at 3:12 PM, James Hale <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> In the referenced thread Monte mentioned something about fmpeg and it associated libraries and licensing.
> Today I was notified of an update the VLC and remembered how that is now available on the App Store.
> Looking at Videolan's site, VLC is GPL 2.
> How is it that it can be distributed under Apple's terms and conditions and still be adhering to its GPL terms and conditions?
> Leaving the fact that there is a conflict here the more interesting question to me is why didn't Apple stop it. I know they did pull it when it first came out for iOS and then a second time but it has been back for a while now. I haven't been able to find anything on the Videolan's site to suggest their license has changed so what gives?
> Is their wiggle room here for LC community apps to get up on the App Store?
>
> James
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Monte Goulding-2

> On 5 May 2016, at 3:34 PM, Monte Goulding <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Mozilla Pubic License

Oh dear… that could be something else entirely ;-)
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Kay C Lan
In reply to this post by Monte Goulding-2
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Monte Goulding <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> We worked hard with all major copyright holders to not repeat history and
> we are confident to have achieved this goal.
>
> My understanding of the situation is that many contributors to VLC were
opposed to the stance of a few zealots at FOSS and were of a similar
opinion to Linus Torvalds:

www.cnet.com/news/torvalds-lambasts
-free-software-foundation/?_escaped_fragment_=#!

These people appreciated that Apple's code neither added to or detracted
from VLC and was simply a distribution system - (not unlike a newsagency or
bookshop). Links to the developers website on the App Store ensured anyone
and everyone could have unlimited access to the source code of VLC. The
zealots took Apple to court, although some VLC contributors argued in
support of Apple. Apple lost, so took the easiest path and simply removed
all GPL software from the App Store - the only people hurt that day were GPL
contributors.

So in a classic paradox, to fulfil their desire to distribute VLC free and
open to the World, a band of contributors freed themselves of the
restrictions placed on them by the FOSS zealots, by rewriting VLC under a
less restrictive open software license, returned it to the Apple Store who
were more than willing to distribute their work as far and as wide as they
could.

Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Bob Sneidar-2
This is why I am always leary of people who want to change the world. The devil is always in the details.

Bob S


On May 5, 2016, at 21:33 , Kay C Lan <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Monte Goulding <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:


We worked hard with all major copyright holders to not repeat history and
we are confident to have achieved this goal.

My understanding of the situation is that many contributors to VLC were
opposed to the stance of a few zealots at FOSS and were of a similar
opinion to Linus Torvalds:

www.cnet.com/news/torvalds-lambasts<http://www.cnet.com/news/torvalds-lambasts>
-free-software-foundation/?_escaped_fragment_=#!

These people appreciated that Apple's code neither added to or detracted
from VLC and was simply a distribution system - (not unlike a newsagency or
bookshop). Links to the developers website on the App Store ensured anyone
and everyone could have unlimited access to the source code of VLC. The
zealots took Apple to court, although some VLC contributors argued in
support of Apple. Apple lost, so took the easiest path and simply removed
all GPL software from the App Store - the only people hurt that day were GPL
contributors.

So in a classic paradox, to fulfil their desire to distribute VLC free and
open to the World, a band of contributors freed themselves of the
restrictions placed on them by the FOSS zealots, by rewriting VLC under a
less restrictive open software license, returned it to the Apple Store who
were more than willing to distribute their work as far and as wide as they
could.

Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

John Dixon

Yes , the devil is in the detail... 'leery', is the word you were looking for ?... :-)

> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)
> Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 14:56:54 +0000
>
> This is why I am always leary of people who want to change the world. The devil is always in the details.
>
> Bob S
>
>
> On May 5, 2016, at 21:33 , Kay C Lan <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Monte Goulding <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>
> We worked hard with all major copyright holders to not repeat history and
> we are confident to have achieved this goal.
>
> My understanding of the situation is that many contributors to VLC were
> opposed to the stance of a few zealots at FOSS and were of a similar
> opinion to Linus Torvalds:
>
> www.cnet.com/news/torvalds-lambasts<http://www.cnet.com/news/torvalds-lambasts>
> -free-software-foundation/?_escaped_fragment_=#!
>
> These people appreciated that Apple's code neither added to or detracted
> from VLC and was simply a distribution system - (not unlike a newsagency or
> bookshop). Links to the developers website on the App Store ensured anyone
> and everyone could have unlimited access to the source code of VLC. The
> zealots took Apple to court, although some VLC contributors argued in
> support of Apple. Apple lost, so took the easiest path and simply removed
> all GPL software from the App Store - the only people hurt that day were GPL
> contributors.
>
> So in a classic paradox, to fulfil their desire to distribute VLC free and
> open to the World, a band of contributors freed themselves of the
> restrictions placed on them by the FOSS zealots, by rewriting VLC under a
> less restrictive open software license, returned it to the Apple Store who
> were more than willing to distribute their work as far and as wide as they
> could.
>
> Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
     
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Dave Kilroy
In reply to this post by jameshale
Long ago, I was a bit leery of using products recommended by Timothy Leary

> Yes , the devil is in the detail... 'leery', is the word you were looking for ?... :-)



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
"The first 90% of the task takes 90% of the time, and the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time."
Peter M. Brigham
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS

mwieder
In reply to this post by John Dixon
On 05/06/2016 08:01 AM, John Dixon wrote:
>
> Yes , the devil is in the detail... 'leery', is the word you were looking for ?... :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary

--
  Mark Wieder
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftware@gmail.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Richard Gaskin
In reply to this post by Bob Sneidar-2
Bob Sneidar wrote:

 > On May 5, 2016, at 21:33 , Kay C Lan wrote:
 >> Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.
 >
 > This is why I am always leary of people who want to change the world.
 > The devil is always in the details.

I prefer Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's variant, "God is in the details."

Neither the invention of the GPL nor its selection among those who use
it is in any way accidental.

Our LiveCode community is comprised mostly of people who have decades of
experience using and building exclusively proprietary software.

In our milieu, the "free" in "free software" is often seen with a focus
on price.  But it's important to remember that the GPL expresses no
opinion about price at all.

This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis"
and "libre".

With "free software", the "free" is about "libre", or "freedom", the
explicit freedoms granted in the license to receive source code, to be
able to study it, to modify it, and to share those modifications with
your neighbor.

There are many open source licenses. While the GPL and its derivatives
are the most popular, there's also the Apache License, Mozilla License,
Python's and PHP's unique licenses, and many others.  There's even a
WTFPL (see <http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/>, though be forewarned about the
language you'll find there <g>).

There are almost as many different open source licenses as there are
proprietary ones.  And like proprietary licenses, each has its own
unique terms and conditions.

One of the reasons the GPL has remained so popular with so many projects
is because of the values it represents. When your goal is sharing, the
GPL can be a very good choice because it ensures the sharing will
continue downstream, that no one can hoard the code released under it.

If that reflects your own values and your goals for a project, the GPL
is a widely accepted solution to make that happen for you.

But as mostly proprietary-only developers, many in our community view
the value of code with different goals, mostly monetary and often
specifically with revenues derived from per-user licensing, which
requires the code remain concealed from the recipient of the software.

In my own view, I see no harm in either approach.  Both have a useful
place.  But they do represent different models of how value is derived.
  While relatively few here see sharing source code as more valuable
than being paid to keep it secret, there are large numbers of developers
in other corners of the world with different goals, where the value of
community contributions outweighs potential license fees.

It may be tempting for those who work exclusively in proprietary
software to dismiss the GPL as idealistic, just as some free software
advocates dismiss proprietary software as user-hostile in preventing
users from fixing bugs or adding features they need.

Personally, I see the GPL as a very pragmatic solution when the goal is
proliferation.  By ensuring downstream enhancements are shared with the
world community, a software released under GPL can only become ever more
capable.

Consider the Internet that deliver this post to you.  Much of the 'Net's
infrastructure is run on truly free software, and most of the routers,
switches, and servers are running Linux.  Linux is also at the heart of
80% of smartphones, 65% of tablets, most embedded devices, and 95% of
the world's supercomputers.  While Windows continues to dominate the
desktop, every other form of computing today is largely a Linux story.

This would not likely have been possible without the GPL.  But by
ensuring that any modifications of the software get shared back to the
community they came from, Linux has become adapted for a much broader
range of use cases than any other OS.

We can hope that over time we'll see similar community-driven
enhancement with LiveCode. And now that v8 is here with Builder, at last
we have a scriptable interface to OS APIs and object definitions
(Widgets).  So going forward enhancing the LiveCode experience is no
longer limited to those proficient in C++.  Anyone who can script can
extend, modify, and share.

And as a dual-licensed system, LiveCode lets us choose either GPL or
other licenses depending on our goals for the project at hand.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

John Dixon

No Richard... it is not a limitation of the language ! You just have
a different perspective ...:-)

Richard Gaskin wrote...
'This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis"
and "libre".'
 

> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)
> From: [hidden email]
> Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 08:57:42 -0700
>
> Bob Sneidar wrote:
>
>  > On May 5, 2016, at 21:33 , Kay C Lan wrote:
>  >> Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.
>  >
>  > This is why I am always leary of people who want to change the world.
>  > The devil is always in the details.
>
> I prefer Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's variant, "God is in the details."
>
> Neither the invention of the GPL nor its selection among those who use
> it is in any way accidental.
>
> Our LiveCode community is comprised mostly of people who have decades of
> experience using and building exclusively proprietary software.
>
> In our milieu, the "free" in "free software" is often seen with a focus
> on price.  But it's important to remember that the GPL expresses no
> opinion about price at all.
>
> This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis"
> and "libre".
>
> With "free software", the "free" is about "libre", or "freedom", the
> explicit freedoms granted in the license to receive source code, to be
> able to study it, to modify it, and to share those modifications with
> your neighbor.
>
> There are many open source licenses. While the GPL and its derivatives
> are the most popular, there's also the Apache License, Mozilla License,
> Python's and PHP's unique licenses, and many others.  There's even a
> WTFPL (see <http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/>, though be forewarned about the
> language you'll find there <g>).
>
> There are almost as many different open source licenses as there are
> proprietary ones.  And like proprietary licenses, each has its own
> unique terms and conditions.
>
> One of the reasons the GPL has remained so popular with so many projects
> is because of the values it represents. When your goal is sharing, the
> GPL can be a very good choice because it ensures the sharing will
> continue downstream, that no one can hoard the code released under it.
>
> If that reflects your own values and your goals for a project, the GPL
> is a widely accepted solution to make that happen for you.
>
> But as mostly proprietary-only developers, many in our community view
> the value of code with different goals, mostly monetary and often
> specifically with revenues derived from per-user licensing, which
> requires the code remain concealed from the recipient of the software.
>
> In my own view, I see no harm in either approach.  Both have a useful
> place.  But they do represent different models of how value is derived.
>   While relatively few here see sharing source code as more valuable
> than being paid to keep it secret, there are large numbers of developers
> in other corners of the world with different goals, where the value of
> community contributions outweighs potential license fees.
>
> It may be tempting for those who work exclusively in proprietary
> software to dismiss the GPL as idealistic, just as some free software
> advocates dismiss proprietary software as user-hostile in preventing
> users from fixing bugs or adding features they need.
>
> Personally, I see the GPL as a very pragmatic solution when the goal is
> proliferation.  By ensuring downstream enhancements are shared with the
> world community, a software released under GPL can only become ever more
> capable.
>
> Consider the Internet that deliver this post to you.  Much of the 'Net's
> infrastructure is run on truly free software, and most of the routers,
> switches, and servers are running Linux.  Linux is also at the heart of
> 80% of smartphones, 65% of tablets, most embedded devices, and 95% of
> the world's supercomputers.  While Windows continues to dominate the
> desktop, every other form of computing today is largely a Linux story.
>
> This would not likely have been possible without the GPL.  But by
> ensuring that any modifications of the software get shared back to the
> community they came from, Linux has become adapted for a much broader
> range of use cases than any other OS.
>
> We can hope that over time we'll see similar community-driven
> enhancement with LiveCode. And now that v8 is here with Builder, at last
> we have a scriptable interface to OS APIs and object definitions
> (Widgets).  So going forward enhancing the LiveCode experience is no
> longer limited to those proficient in C++.  Anyone who can script can
> extend, modify, and share.
>
> And as a dual-licensed system, LiveCode lets us choose either GPL or
> other licenses depending on our goals for the project at hand.
>
> --
>   Richard Gaskin
>   Fourth World Systems
>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>   ____________________________________________________________________
>   [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
     
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

pmbrig
On May 6, 2016, at 12:05 PM, John Dixon wrote:

> No Richard... it is not a limitation of the language ! You just have
> a different perspective ...:-)
>
> Richard Gaskin wrote...
> 'This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis"
> and "libre".'

Off topic, but I have a bumpersticker that makes use of the ambiguity:

If money = speech then speech is not free.

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

HTML5 LC Download Icon?

Rick Harrison
In reply to this post by John Dixon
I’ve been playing around with HTML5
in the Community Version of LC 8.

Although I think the small green LC App Download
button is an interesting idea, I might want my users
to only use the app online. I might not want them
downloading it into their computer.

How do I disable that LC button which is
part of the frame on the right side, or
make it disappear altogether?

It also appears there is no way to
store information in a permanent
way in flat files or to a database,
unless I’m missing something here.

Your thoughts, ideas, or suggestions?

Thanks,

Rick
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Kay C Lan
In reply to this post by Richard Gaskin
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Richard Gaskin
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There are many open source licenses.

Yes, just like there are many political systems - all supposedly for
the betterment 'of the people'. Even in democratic societies the
variations are tremendous - and their success also. And just because a
system succeeds doesn't mean it can't be made better.

From my own naive perspective such success depends very much on
whether 'libre' is 'inclusive' or 'exclusive'. Where there are 'good
guys' and 'bad guys' then IMO you are only handicapping your own
success. I think the movie Invictus:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/

is a brilliant demonstration of the advantage of eliminating the 'us'
and 'them' attitude. You yourself have stated on this List that those
in charge of GPL, if anyone ever finds a loophole which skirts the
intended path that GPL has chosen to tread then the GPL will be
amended to immediately exclude that loophole.

As I linked previously, and indicated, I tend to agree with Linus
Torvalds that as the GPL has progressed it has become apparent that
it's an 'us' and 'them' kind of license. You offered the success of
Linux as proof of the pudding as to how great GPL is but you failed to
 mention that the Linux Kernel is forever held to GPL v 2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#GPL_version_3

and this wasn't just Torvalds, but the majority of key contributors
realised that GPL v 3 was not the 'Mandela' approach to a world where
both open and closed software had it's place and both could help each
other achieve greatness they couldn't achieve on their own. You also
failed to mention that Torvalds' Git (now a mainstay of LC) is also
firmly GPL v 2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_%28software%29

Nor did you indicate that the majority of GPL software is still GPL v
2 or that the percentage of OSS using GPL is on the decline:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Adoption

IMO an indication that whilst the original GPL goal was 'libre', some
started to realise that loophole closing was 'libre' only to those who
were 'white good guys', and it was heading down a more 'us' and 'them'
kind of mentality which was not the 'libre' for developers to choose
$0, $$$, open, closed or mix and match kind of future that Torvalds et
al envisaged would truly benefit everyone.

The reason there are many variations on the 'libre' license, is
because GPL v 3 clearly doesn't get everyone's vote as giving
'everyone' the freedom they are truly looking for in how they write
AND distribute their code. It's an attempt to make a good system
better.

I agree with you, well Ludwig Mies van der Rohe - God is in the
details; you need to read the details and then carefully decide which
license truly gives YOU and EVERYONE ELSE the 'libre' to use and
distribute code.

Or to put it more bluntly, this attitude:

"Richard Stallman and the FSF specifically encourage library-writers
to license under the GPL so that proprietary programs cannot use the
libraries, in an effort to protect the free-software world by giving
it more tools than the proprietary world." -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Linking_and_derived_works

strikes me as blatant, upfront, software apartheid.

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

Richard Gaskin
Kay C Lan wrote:

> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>
>> There are many open source licenses.
>
>...just because a system succeeds doesn't mean it can't be made better.

Of course.  Ours is an imperfect world.  No single license can serve all
goals, and all systems can always be improved.

My only point was that the GPL seems a reasonably good fit for LiveCode
Ltd's goals with its Community Edition.


> You offered the success of Linux as proof of the pudding as to how
> great GPL is but you failed to mention that the Linux Kernel is
> forever held to GPL v 2:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#GPL_version_3

Yes, Linux uses GPL.

I don't see where my not noting which specific version of the GPL the
project uses is necessarily a "failure".  I'm just a developer; my job
does not involve either managing the Linux project nor advocating any
specific licenses for others to use. I merely share the opinion of
LiveCode Ltd's counsel that the GPL is a good fit for their goals at
this time.


As a very separate side matter unrelated to what I wrote, the
differences between GPL v2 and v3 are indeed interesting, esp. in our
modern world of rampant software patent abuse.

One of the reasons GPL v2 is especially useful for Linux is that GPL v3
includes limitations on patent claims, while Linux has been spared from
being abused by patent trolls by using the more patent-neutral language
of GPL v2 to build a massive pool of defensive patents - anyone who
might consider suing Linux over a patent will likely be counter-sued
into oblivion:
<http://www.infoworld.com/article/2654277/applications/consortium-launches-linux-patent-pool.html>

Quite clever of them, though I prefer New Zealand's solution as even
simpler:  as a general rule their courts don't normally hear cases for
software patents at all.

But we digress....


> Nor did you indicate that the majority of GPL software is still GPL v
> 2 or that the percentage of OSS using GPL is on the decline:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Adoption

What I wrote was:

    While the GPL and its derivatives are the most popular, there's
    also the Apache License, Mozilla License, Python's and PHP's
    unique licenses, and many others.

Providing a breakdown of specific versions and variants (LGPL, AGPL,
etc.) and timeline trends for each is simply beyond the scope of my
interest.  Besides, too many of my posts are already too long; it hardly
seems useful for anyone if I were to err on the side of completeness. ;)

If you have feel GPL v2 is a better fit for LiveCode's goals than GPL v3
I suppose you could email Kevin with the business case for that.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

Peter TB Brett
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison
On 07/05/2016 02:09, Rick Harrison wrote:
> I’ve been playing around with HTML5
> in the Community Version of LC 8.
>
> Although I think the small green LC App Download
> button is an interesting idea, I might want my users
> to only use the app online. I might not want them
> downloading it into their computer.

They are already downloading it onto their computer in order to run it.
You are distributing your app (and LiveCode!) to them, which means that
under the terms of the GPLv3 you must provide them with the complete
corresponding source code in the preferred form for modification.

The convenient button helps you comply with the license.

> How do I disable that LC button which is
> part of the frame on the right side, or
> make it disappear altogether?

Use LiveCode Indy or Commercial, or compile a version of the Open Source
LiveCode HTML5 engine that doesn't include that piece of code.

> It also appears there is no way to
> store information in a permanent
> way in flat files or to a database,
> unless I’m missing something here.

At the moment there's no persistence implemented, sorry. :-(

                                    Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett <[hidden email]>
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

[-hh]
Just to avoid misunderstandings for HTML5-standalones
(one has to read Peter's posts always twice...):
Using a licensed version of LiveCode disables the
download icon. But:

Downloading can NOT be disabled, no matter the license.
Reading scripts can NOT be disabled, no matter the license.

Not showing the download icon/link does NOT disable the
download and script view of the zipped stack. Even the extra
HTML5 license does NOT allow to protect the source code.

The zipped stack is in the same folder as the calling HTML.
If the default is used then replacing the last path item in
the browser by "standalone.zip" downloads the stack. Or you
have to use a custom zip name (find its name in the HTML
page source code, no matter the license).

I told my naming convention the users of my HTML5-modules
in the HTML5 forum, so they don't have to look into the
HTML source (for example "MathBeauties1b-8.0.0-rc-1.zip").

Hermann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

Rick Harrison
In reply to this post by Peter TB Brett
Hi Peter,

The reason I’ve been playing around with the Community Version of HTML5
was so I could determine if HTML5 was ready for primetime for me to start my
Indy License which I prepaid for when I backed the KickStarter Campaign for it.

I wanted to make sure that the Indy version didn’t have icons forced upon my
app that I didn’t want, hence my question.

I’m glad to hear that the Indy version doesn’t include that piece of code.

My vision of HTML5 apparently was totally different from what the team
envisioned.  What I wanted was something that would generate the
HTML5 code which I would put on my server that would then execute
as a LiveCode App.  Instead the engine and the app are downloaded
to the users computer.  Why is this better than the Web Plug-In we used
to have which used to do something similar?

I also noticed that there is a spinning wheel which indicates the download.
Wouldn’t a progress bar be better so the user has some idea of how
long the wait might be?  Is it possible to create a progress bar for that,
or is it beyond the capability as it now stands?

Sadly, since the database/file persistence hasn’t been implemented, this
version of HTML5 is pretty worthless to me.  Now I’m again left with the
dilemma of trying to figure out if I should start using my Indy License
for HTML5 or not.

Thanks for getting back to me Peter!

Rick



> On May 13, 2016, at 11:58 AM, Peter TB Brett <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 07/05/2016 02:09, Rick Harrison wrote:
>> I’ve been playing around with HTML5
>> in the Community Version of LC 8.
>>
>> Although I think the small green LC App Download
>> button is an interesting idea, I might want my users
>> to only use the app online. I might not want them
>> downloading it into their computer.
>
> They are already downloading it onto their computer in order to run it. You are distributing your app (and LiveCode!) to them, which means that under the terms of the GPLv3 you must provide them with the complete corresponding source code in the preferred form for modification.
>
> The convenient button helps you comply with the license.
>
>> How do I disable that LC button which is
>> part of the frame on the right side, or
>> make it disappear altogether?
>
> Use LiveCode Indy or Commercial, or compile a version of the Open Source LiveCode HTML5 engine that doesn't include that piece of code.
>
>> It also appears there is no way to
>> store information in a permanent
>> way in flat files or to a database,
>> unless I’m missing something here.
>
> At the moment there's no persistence implemented, sorry. :-(
>
>                                   Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett <[hidden email]>
> LiveCode Open Source Team
>
> LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

Rick Harrison
In reply to this post by [-hh]
Hi Herman,

Yes, I understand now that everything gets downloaded
with this HTML5 deployment including my app.
That being the case, I find the icon to be annoying, but
I’m glad to here that my future (already paid for) license
will get rid of the thing.

HTML5 still being in the early experimental stage which
also has no means of communicating with outside files
or databases kills any potential usefulness of it’s
abilities for me.  That makes it difficult to determine
when I should start my license for it.  I was looking
for a finished/polished product, not a beta/experimental
version.

Since HTML5 downloads my app anyway, it probably
makes more sense for me to just have a standard link
in one of my webpages which points the user to
download and install the correct version of my app
for Mac or Windows or Linux.  Then my app can
talk to whatever files or databases it needs to,
without any unwanted green icons.

What I really wanted from HTML5, was something
similar to a “Dream Weaver” on steroids for LiveCode
that would write the HTML5 for me for easy deployment
to my server-side website.  I didn’t want a client-based
downloading type app that doesn’t communicate with
files or databases.  Oh well…

Thanks for your response!

Rick


> On May 13, 2016, at 12:44 PM, [-hh] <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Just to avoid misunderstandings for HTML5-standalones
> (one has to read Peter's posts always twice...):
> Using a licensed version of LiveCode disables the
> download icon. But:
>
> Downloading can NOT be disabled, no matter the license.
> Reading scripts can NOT be disabled, no matter the license.
>
> Not showing the download icon/link does NOT disable the
> download and script view of the zipped stack. Even the extra
> HTML5 license does NOT allow to protect the source code.
>
> The zipped stack is in the same folder as the calling HTML.
> If the default is used then replacing the last path item in
> the browser by "standalone.zip" downloads the stack. Or you
> have to use a custom zip name (find its name in the HTML
> page source code, no matter the license).
>
> I told my naming convention the users of my HTML5-modules
> in the HTML5 forum, so they don't have to look into the
> HTML source (for example "MathBeauties1b-8.0.0-rc-1.zip").
>
> Hermann
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/VLC-and-GPL-and-LC-on-iOS-was-Re-MergEXT-now-included-with-Indy-Business-IDE-tp4704298p4704627.html
> Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

J. Landman Gay
On 5/15/2016 9:18 AM, Rick Harrison wrote:
> HTML5 still being in the early experimental stage which
> also has no means of communicating with outside files
> or databases kills any potential usefulness of it’s
> abilities for me.

Isn't that a browser restriction to prevent malware from reading and
writing to the user's hard drive?

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     [hidden email]
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HTML5 LC Download Icon?

Richard Gaskin
J. Landman Gay wrote:

 > On 5/15/2016 9:18 AM, Rick Harrison wrote:
 >> HTML5 still being in the early experimental stage which
 >> also has no means of communicating with outside files
 >> or databases kills any potential usefulness of it’s
 >> abilities for me.
 >
 > Isn't that a browser restriction to prevent malware from reading and
 > writing to the user's hard drive?

I believe it's more pervasive:  since sockets aren't in the build,
nothing in libURL works.  And since it isn't yet integrated with
browser-native features like XHR or WebSockets, nothing normal browser
apps do will work either.

AFAIK, in the current build, HTML output from LC is more or less an
island, unable to communicate with the outside world.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for Desktop, Mobile, and Web
  ____________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]        http://www.FourthWorld.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
12