Rexx2Nrx release 7.00: Dual Licence advise needed
Locked
 
|
Hello NetRexxer's,
as a matter of fact, I will need advise from somebody there, as follows: 1.) I'm just about to release the former Rexx2Nrx run-time package OPEN source under the ICU licence (as a present to IBM to have introduced NetRexx <grin>) to www.netrexx.org (including sources, and ICU terms) package name will be: org.netrexx.runtime.compatibility I'm sure you did hear enough from my previous announcements to catch this part. 2.) I'm also just just about to release a couple of utilities (as I think) OPEN SOURCE under the ICU licence. Package name will be:: org.netrexx.utils 3.) ... and, I'm just about to release Rexx2Nrx release 7.00 to the public, and I do really have problems to decide wether *and* how I should release those as open source. You might imagine, that the development of Rexx2Nrx has been not a one-weeks task. Actually, I did invest a lot of time into this. As I do have no current employment (I'm already in pension), and as my pension is too low for my living style, I would like to earn money, after some heavy years of work... Sorry to say that ;-) Now, my question: I would like to: a) forward the source of Rexx2Nrx to org.netrexx b) make it free for private usage, especially to REXXLA members c) get a LICENCE FEE for commercial usage. If, and when, anybody of you could re-direct me to a proper DUAL Licence model you will be more than welcome. I'm simply not finding anybody here in Austria fluent enough on this issue to resolve it by my own. :-( Thomas. -- Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com) _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/
Thomas Schneider, Vienna, Austria (Europe) :-)
www.thsitc.com www.db-123.com |
|
Thomas, I don't know enough to answer your license questions, but I
feel strongly that all of your packages should have an additional qualifier in their names: org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility org.netrexx.thsitc.utils This will allow others to offer their own add-on packages without worrying about a namespace collision with yours. -Chip- On 7/5/11 21:48 Thomas Schneider said: > Hello NetRexxer's, > > as a matter of fact, I will need advise from somebody there, as follows: > > 1.) I'm just about to release the former Rexx2Nrx run-time package OPEN > source under the ICU licence (as a present to IBM to have introduced > NetRexx <grin>) to www.netrexx.org (including sources, and ICU terms) > > package name will be: > > org.netrexx.runtime.compatibility > > I'm sure you did hear enough from my previous announcements to catch > this part. > > 2.) I'm also just just about to release a couple of utilities (as I think) > OPEN SOURCE under the ICU licence. > > Package name will be:: > > org.netrexx.utils > > 3.) ... and, I'm just about to release Rexx2Nrx release 7.00 to the public, > and I do really have problems to decide wether *and* how I should release > those as open source. > > You might imagine, that the development of Rexx2Nrx has been not a > one-weeks task. Actually, I did invest a lot of time into this. > > As I do have no current employment (I'm already in pension), and as my > pension is too low for my living style, I would like to earn money, > after some > heavy years of work... Sorry to say that ;-) > > Now, my question: > > I would like to: > > a) forward the source of Rexx2Nrx to org.netrexx > b) make it free for private usage, especially to REXXLA members > c) get a LICENCE FEE for commercial usage. > > If, and when, anybody of you could re-direct me to a proper DUAL Licence > model you will be more than welcome. > > I'm simply not finding anybody here in Austria fluent enough on this issue > to resolve it by my own. :-( > > Thomas. > Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
|
|
Rene has decided, in his wisdom, that I should use the package names
shown.... :-) (as far as I did read the corresponence <grin>) Maybe you should discuss with him :-) Or what ? Thomas. ===================================================== Am 06.07.2011 00:12, schrieb Chip Davis: > Thomas, I don't know enough to answer your license questions, but I > feel strongly that all of your packages should have an additional > qualifier in their names: > > org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility > > org.netrexx.thsitc.utils > > This will allow others to offer their own add-on packages without > worrying about a namespace collision with yours. > > -Chip- > > On 7/5/11 21:48 Thomas Schneider said: >> Hello NetRexxer's, >> >> as a matter of fact, I will need advise from somebody there, as follows: >> >> 1.) I'm just about to release the former Rexx2Nrx run-time package >> OPEN source under the ICU licence (as a present to IBM to have >> introduced NetRexx <grin>) to www.netrexx.org (including sources, and >> ICU terms) >> >> package name will be: >> >> org.netrexx.runtime.compatibility >> >> I'm sure you did hear enough from my previous announcements to catch >> this part. >> >> 2.) I'm also just just about to release a couple of utilities (as I >> think) >> OPEN SOURCE under the ICU licence. >> >> Package name will be:: >> >> org.netrexx.utils >> >> 3.) ... and, I'm just about to release Rexx2Nrx release 7.00 to the >> public, >> and I do really have problems to decide wether *and* how I should >> release >> those as open source. >> >> You might imagine, that the development of Rexx2Nrx has been not a >> one-weeks task. Actually, I did invest a lot of time into this. >> >> As I do have no current employment (I'm already in pension), and as >> my pension is too low for my living style, I would like to earn >> money, after some >> heavy years of work... Sorry to say that ;-) >> >> Now, my question: >> >> I would like to: >> >> a) forward the source of Rexx2Nrx to org.netrexx >> b) make it free for private usage, especially to REXXLA members >> c) get a LICENCE FEE for commercial usage. >> >> If, and when, anybody of you could re-direct me to a proper DUAL Licence >> model you will be more than welcome. >> >> I'm simply not finding anybody here in Austria fluent enough on this >> issue >> to resolve it by my own. :-( >> >> Thomas. >> > _______________________________________________ > Ibm-netrexx mailing list > [hidden email] > Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ > > -- Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com) _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/
Thomas Schneider, Vienna, Austria (Europe) :-)
www.thsitc.com www.db-123.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Aviatrexx
There will be NO namespace collision, as nobody else, except me,
did try to establish and maintain Rexxx upwards compatatibility. Sorry to say that for you, Chip, and all others.... Thomas. ======================================================== Am 06.07.2011 00:12, schrieb Chip Davis: > Thomas, I don't know enough to answer your license questions, but I > feel strongly that all of your packages should have an additional > qualifier in their names: > > org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility > > org.netrexx.thsitc.utils > > This will allow others to offer their own add-on packages without > worrying about a namespace collision with yours. > > -Chip- > > On 7/5/11 21:48 Thomas Schneider said: >> Hello NetRexxer's, >> >> as a matter of fact, I will need advise from somebody there, as follows: >> >> 1.) I'm just about to release the former Rexx2Nrx run-time package >> OPEN source under the ICU licence (as a present to IBM to have >> introduced NetRexx <grin>) to www.netrexx.org (including sources, and >> ICU terms) >> >> package name will be: >> >> org.netrexx.runtime.compatibility >> >> I'm sure you did hear enough from my previous announcements to catch >> this part. >> >> 2.) I'm also just just about to release a couple of utilities (as I >> think) >> OPEN SOURCE under the ICU licence. >> >> Package name will be:: >> >> org.netrexx.utils >> >> 3.) ... and, I'm just about to release Rexx2Nrx release 7.00 to the >> public, >> and I do really have problems to decide wether *and* how I should >> release >> those as open source. >> >> You might imagine, that the development of Rexx2Nrx has been not a >> one-weeks task. Actually, I did invest a lot of time into this. >> >> As I do have no current employment (I'm already in pension), and as >> my pension is too low for my living style, I would like to earn >> money, after some >> heavy years of work... Sorry to say that ;-) >> >> Now, my question: >> >> I would like to: >> >> a) forward the source of Rexx2Nrx to org.netrexx >> b) make it free for private usage, especially to REXXLA members >> c) get a LICENCE FEE for commercial usage. >> >> If, and when, anybody of you could re-direct me to a proper DUAL Licence >> model you will be more than welcome. >> >> I'm simply not finding anybody here in Austria fluent enough on this >> issue >> to resolve it by my own. :-( >> >> Thomas. >> > _______________________________________________ > Ibm-netrexx mailing list > [hidden email] > Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ > > -- Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com) _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/
Thomas Schneider, Vienna, Austria (Europe) :-)
www.thsitc.com www.db-123.com |
Re: Rexx2Nrx release 7.00: Dual Licence advise needed
|
|
In reply to this post by Aviatrexx
Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>all of your packages should have an additional >qualifier in their names: > > org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility > > org.netrexx.thsitc.utils > I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. Tom. Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
Re: Rexx2Nrx release 7.00: Dual Licence advise needed
|
|
In reply to this post by Aviatrexx
Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>all of your packages should have an additional >qualifier in their names: > > org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility > > org.netrexx.thsitc.utils > I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. Tom. Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by Tom Maynard
Hello Tom Maynard, Chip, & all,
I am totally open to any decision taken on this point by the responsible persons. I did use the namespaces as Rene Vincent Jansen proposed to me. Rene, could you please comment on this. I would need a decision as soon as possible, as it would mean that I would have to recompile all of my software again, and change my various Program Generators as well to emit the correct package names, and the HTML doc's I'm maintaining ... :-( Hence, I will wait with any further deployments from my site to org.netrexx until we do have conventions where all members can live with :-) No real problem for me (except that it will waste my time to change everything again :-( ) Thomas Schneider. PS: I did also change the title of this thread so that It's easier for all of us to find the correspondence related to this topic.... PPS: What I would like to avaoid is that I'll have to maintain two different versions (One for my private usage, and one for org.netrexx) :-) =========================================================== Am 06.07.2011 01:42, schrieb Tom Maynard: > Chip Davis<[hidden email]> wrote: > >> all of your packages should have an additional >> qualifier in their names: >> >> org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility >> >> org.netrexx.thsitc.utils >> > I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. > > Tom. > > Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T > _______________________________________________ > Ibm-netrexx mailing list > [hidden email] > Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ > > -- Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com) _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/
Thomas Schneider, Vienna, Austria (Europe) :-)
www.thsitc.com www.db-123.com |
Re: org.netrexx namespace conventions
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 Hi, what about org.netrexx.contrib.<modulename>? IMHO it would fit better as Thomas obviously wants to dual license this (though dual license with ICU doesn't make any sense, ICU is too liberal for commercial exclusion). So Thomas' Rexx compatibility pack would have a package 'org.netrexx.contrib.rexxcompat' or so. It has three intentions expressed clearly: - - the 'org.netrexx' part clearly connects it to the official NetRexx project - - the 'contrib' part tells it's not core, but a contributed part - - the modulename part separates person from modules, so if Thomas doesn't have time for it anymore, someone else could take it over. cu, Patric Thomas Schneider schrieb am 06.07.2011 15:49: > Hello Tom Maynard, Chip, & all, > > I am totally open to any decision taken on this point by the responsible > persons. > > I did use the namespaces as Rene Vincent Jansen proposed to me. > > Rene, could you please comment on this. > > I would need a decision as soon as possible, as it would mean that I > would have to recompile all of my software again, and change my various > Program Generators as well to emit the correct package names, and the > HTML doc's I'm maintaining ... :-( > > Hence, I will wait with any further deployments from my site to org.netrexx > until we do have conventions where all members can live with :-) > > No real problem for me (except that it will waste my time to change > everything again :-( ) > > Thomas Schneider. > > PS: I did also change the title of this thread so that It's easier for > all of us > to find the correspondence related to this topic.... > > PPS: What I would like to avaoid is that I'll have to maintain two > different versions (One for my private usage, and one for org.netrexx) :-) > =========================================================== > > Am 06.07.2011 01:42, schrieb Tom Maynard: >> Chip Davis<[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> all of your packages should have an additional >>> qualifier in their names: >>> >>> org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility >>> >>> org.netrexx.thsitc.utils >>> >> I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. >> >> Tom. - -- cu, Patric -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GnuPT 2.5.2 iEYEARECAAYFAk4UcOAACgkQfGgGu8y7ypCvMgCg+RhxRdJl1/iHZ+wmL08Fufmw vYwAoKJlFkVndrtMkcaCrNqt5DL1fgrH =Z01S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by ThSITC
Thomas,
the trick here is to work as efficiently as possible. This entails not keeping separate private working environments of things that have been open sourced, using version mangement in an optimal way, and having build procedures that do not involve typing more than 4 characters for a rebuild of your systems. Having said this, I can understand why there was a requirement for an extra qualifier raised. Please do as Chip has suggested, and send the stuff so it can be entered into a suitable part of the repository. Thank you for going through the trouble of releasing your work as open source - I hope we can compete this phase soon now. best regards, René Jansen. On 6 jul 2011, at 15:49, Thomas Schneider wrote: > Hello Tom Maynard, Chip, & all, > > I am totally open to any decision taken on this point by the responsible persons. > > I did use the namespaces as Rene Vincent Jansen proposed to me. > > Rene, could you please comment on this. > > I would need a decision as soon as possible, as it would mean that I would have to recompile all of my software again, and change my various Program Generators as well to emit the correct package names, and the HTML doc's I'm maintaining ... :-( > > Hence, I will wait with any further deployments from my site to org.netrexx > until we do have conventions where all members can live with :-) > > No real problem for me (except that it will waste my time to change everything again :-( ) > > Thomas Schneider. > > PS: I did also change the title of this thread so that It's easier for all of us > to find the correspondence related to this topic.... > > PPS: What I would like to avaoid is that I'll have to maintain two different versions (One for my private usage, and one for org.netrexx) :-) > =========================================================== > > Am 06.07.2011 01:42, schrieb Tom Maynard: >> Chip Davis<[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> all of your packages should have an additional >>> qualifier in their names: >>> >>> org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility >>> >>> org.netrexx.thsitc.utils >>> >> I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. >> >> Tom. >> >> Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T >> _______________________________________________ >> Ibm-netrexx mailing list >> [hidden email] >> Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ >> >> > > > -- > Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com) > _______________________________________________ > Ibm-netrexx mailing list > [hidden email] > Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ > _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by Patric Bechtel
Patric,
I discussed this yesterday with Thomas and also indicated that this seemed nearly impossible and won't hold up anywhere. We came up with a plan to open source the runtime - compatibility - package and the Rexx part of Thomas's translator as open source, and keep the commercial part as closed source plugins - these being PL/I and COBOL and the likes, they are the only parts with commercial viability (for the larger companies that have plans with their source code bases). i think the 'contrib' qualifier has an undue 'not-really-core' connotation that we really should avoid. All decisions on naming and packaging are pending still- and when things are in the repository, we can change the package names around easily. Also, what will packaged in which jars - we will initially not change a lot. best regards, René. On 6 jul 2011, at 16:27, Patric Bechtel wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > what about org.netrexx.contrib.<modulename>? > > IMHO it would fit better as Thomas obviously wants to dual license this > (though dual license with ICU doesn't make any sense, ICU is too liberal > for commercial exclusion). > > So Thomas' Rexx compatibility pack would have a package > 'org.netrexx.contrib.rexxcompat' or so. > > It has three intentions expressed clearly: > - - the 'org.netrexx' part clearly connects it to the official NetRexx > project > - - the 'contrib' part tells it's not core, but a contributed part > - - the modulename part separates person from modules, so if Thomas > doesn't have time for it anymore, someone else could take it over. > > cu, Patric > > Thomas Schneider schrieb am 06.07.2011 15:49: >> Hello Tom Maynard, Chip, & all, >> >> I am totally open to any decision taken on this point by the responsible >> persons. >> >> I did use the namespaces as Rene Vincent Jansen proposed to me. >> >> Rene, could you please comment on this. >> >> I would need a decision as soon as possible, as it would mean that I >> would have to recompile all of my software again, and change my various >> Program Generators as well to emit the correct package names, and the >> HTML doc's I'm maintaining ... :-( >> >> Hence, I will wait with any further deployments from my site to org.netrexx >> until we do have conventions where all members can live with :-) >> >> No real problem for me (except that it will waste my time to change >> everything again :-( ) >> >> Thomas Schneider. >> >> PS: I did also change the title of this thread so that It's easier for >> all of us >> to find the correspondence related to this topic.... >> >> PPS: What I would like to avaoid is that I'll have to maintain two >> different versions (One for my private usage, and one for org.netrexx) :-) >> =========================================================== >> >> Am 06.07.2011 01:42, schrieb Tom Maynard: >>> Chip Davis<[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> all of your packages should have an additional >>>> qualifier in their names: >>>> >>>> org.netrexx.thsitc.runtime.compatibility >>>> >>>> org.netrexx.thsitc.utils >>>> >>> I agree completely ... that's the point of namespaces, after all. >>> >>> Tom. > > - -- > cu, Patric > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: GnuPT 2.5.2 > > iEYEARECAAYFAk4UcOAACgkQfGgGu8y7ypCvMgCg+RhxRdJl1/iHZ+wmL08Fufmw > vYwAoKJlFkVndrtMkcaCrNqt5DL1fgrH > =Z01S > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > Ibm-netrexx mailing list > [hidden email] > Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ > _______________________________________________ Ibm-netrexx mailing list [hidden email] Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/ |
«
Return to ibm-netrexx
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |