[Gtk-sharp-list] DataGrid control, data binding, ObjectViews, Swf,
don at env.com.ua
Thu Dec 15 17:45:53 EST 2005
On 12/15/05, Todd Berman <tberman at off.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 11:29 -0300, Victor Rafael Rivarola Soerensen
> (FANATICO y LOCO por Cristo) wrote:
> > >
> > > I like to use NPlot, for example, it uses Windows.Drawing, do you know
> > > alternative to it in pure Cairo-based Gtk#?
> > >
> NPlot works under Gtk#. Not really really well, but it does work.
Yes, I use it under windows version of my program and it is quite stable.
As I unndertood there is a possibiliti to use any Swf control in Gtk if it
is Graphics-based and
has presentation (control, form) separated from rendering, logic.
> > > > #6) I have no idea what license the data grid is under, but if it is
> > > > MIT X11, it will have to be removed from MD with a quickness. If
> > > > can relicense it, great, if he cant/wont, then its toast, we *DO
> > > > want to push any license but the MIT X11.
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you give a one short definition of why in your oppinion is MIT X11
> > > better then i.e. LGPL?
> > > If there will be some library/widget which is veeeery good and
> > > under LGPL and
> > > you'd like to use it in MD will not you miss it?
> > The difference is freedom, in the real sense.
> > The free GPL/LGPL licenses allows for _real_freedom_. In other words,
> > as with all freedoms, there are limits. And it is those limits that
> > those licenses have. I am free to take my shotgun and shoting animals
> > on thee wilderness (as long as I am not killing protected specicies
> > noor in reproduction times), but my freedom stops short of allowing me
> > to go for a shooting spree on the downtown mall killing anything that
> > moves, instead.
> > The more libertine MIT X11 license allows for _real_libertinane_
> > behaviour. It allows for somebody to take code, lock it away in tight
> > locks, modify it at will, and then redistribute it with a license of
> > his own choosing, removing my . With it, I could go the downtown mall
> > for my shooting spree, but I could also go to the wilderness. This
> > license is even worst that the libertine New BSD license, because it
> > would allow somebody to write(?) a proprietary software and then claim
> > that it is endorsed by me.
> Not really willing to get into this debate. However, you are wrong.
> Considering that you were unable to even recognize the MIT X11 license,
> I'm not quite sure why you feel expert enough to explain the
> ramifications of choosing it.
> Gennadiy, as far as use in MD, we have made an exception for the Dock,
> and are unlikely to make any other exceptions.
Yes, there maybe some parts, I dit not look in details but probably
Commands and menus / toolbars
management can be also extracted.
We feel that the MIT X11 allows for the greatest possible reuse of code.
> Yes, that does mean that someone could take your MIT X11 licensed code
> and use it in their commercial application, but they can do that with
> the GPL or LGPL, they just have to jump through hoops.
ok, thanks for the info.
Basically, I am an optimist. I believe that people contribute code back
> because they want to, not because they have to. The MIT X11 license fits
> in with this. If a company modifies some code and doesn't want to give
> it back, well, did you really lose out? They weren't going to give code
> back regardless. And at least this way they will likely submit bugs.
> Having worked for companies that utilize opensource code, we contribute
> code back because we want to, not because we have to.
Anyway, a licensing debate is not worth my time, or anyone on this lists
> time. I wanted to provide an alternate opinion, one that was a bit less
> toe-the-RMS-line. If you are interested in other differences between
> them, google is sure to find tons and tons of material.
Yes, lets stop licensing discussion, from what I've understood until now MIT
is also fine for me :).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gtk-sharp-list