[Mono-list] AppServer code is posted

Brian Ritchie brianlritchie@hotmail.com
Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:35:21 -0500


Thanks for your commments.  I'm working on replacing the Cassini module with 
the XSP code from Mono.  I'll make the Cassini module a seperate download.  
Also, Miguel has pointed me in the direction of some great artwork that I 
can use.

I've been extremely busy at work, so it will be a bit before I can post 
these changes.


>From: "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@virgin.net>
>To: <mono-list@ximian.com>
>Subject: RE: [Mono-list] AppServer code is posted
>Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:55:47 -0000
> > On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 19:10, Brian Ritchie wrote:
> > > Thanks for all of the "instructions" on open source.  I'm by no means 
> > > veteran in the "movement", but just a hacker trying to add some
> > value to a
> > > worthwhile project.
> >
> > I'm sorry if I came off as harsh. It's just I've never seen so much
> > Microsoft IP in a purportedly X11-licensed open source project.
>If Microsoft's license allows this (and I don't know that it does), why do
>you feel this is an issue?
> > Moreover, I don't think it reflects well on the efforts other members of
> > the project have put in.
>I don't see how this is relevant at all.
> > Specifically, it's your choice of name that I
> > disagree with. It's not fair that Mono should be associated with your
> > AppServer in any way.
>Fair?. What would be a fair use of the Mono label in your _opinion_?
> > I don't think you should try to represent this as an "open source"
> > issue; it's far more fundamental, and what you're doing would be no more
> > acceptable were you writing proprietary software.
>If the license permits wholesale usage and redistribution, I see no problem
> > > The Microsoft portion that you are referring to is a component
> > of the system
> > > that could be easily removed.  It could be replaced, for
> > example, with the
> > > XSP code from Mono.  I can remove it if it is causing
> > problems...but I'm not
> > > sure if it is...Here's a link from MS that says the code is free:
> > > http://www.asp.net/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?tabindex=1&PostID=77371
> > > Any legal advice is appreciated, I'm no expert on licensing issues.
> >
> > There's a very good reason why the Mono developers didn't first take
> > sscli/Rotor and then slowly replace Microsoft code line-by-line at their
> > own leisure.
>The fact that Mono began before sscli/Rotor was released is one very good
>reason I would have thought. Fears about possible MS patent claims is
>another. And then there is the issue of license violations. None of this
>reasons, except the license issue seem to apply to Cassini.
> > > If the graphics are an issue, they too could be replaced.  I've
> > seen many
> > > open source projects using such images, but if it is a
> > problem...then by all
> > > means, lets remove them.  Do you have links to some free images?
> >
> > It's not a matter of "if". You're are redistributing the Microsoft
> > artwork right now and passing it off as your own.
>This is just plain wrong. He very clearly states on his website that 
>is embedded. He also attributes other tools/portions appropriately. I
>haven't downloaded the source though.
> > This doesn't disturb
> > me at all -- I've seen it all before. However, I don't think it's fair
> > on Mono developers for you to redistribute it under the "Mono" moniker.
>Then why kick up such a fuss?. A simple reply that queried the licensing 
>copyright issues is all that was needed.
> > Where does original work end and re-branding begin?
>Why is the difference important as long as contributors are fairly
>attributed and their license permits such re-branding?
> >I draw the line
> > where Microsoft artwork and source code are included byte-for-byte
> > without accreditation in a project that claims (in readme.txt) to be
> > under the X11 license.
>See Brian's - or rather the AppServer's - website.
> > Copying on this scale cannot be an oversight. This is wholesale
> > re-duplication. Considering the lack of accreditation, it could also be
> > classified as plagiarism.
>See above. I would have thought that Mono would benefit more if people
>contribute well-tested, properly attributed code - copied or not - rather
>than flaky, all-invented-here code.
> > > I'm happy to make changes that would bring this software more
> > in line with
> > > the Mono project.  Hopefully we can discuss these changes in a more
> > > constructive way in the future.
> >
> > Good rule to go by: Call it Mono* the day it hits the Mono CVS servers.
> > Of course, I'd be rather surprised if getting your AppServer in there
> > from its current state is possible.
>If it is good enough and there are no licensing/patent issues, I can see no
>reason to exclude it from Mono. However, I fear that the Cassini license
>properly forbids what Brian has in mind.
>Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@ximian.com

MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*.