The Death of D. (Was Tango vs Phobos)

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"superdan" wrote
> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>
>> "superdan" wrote
>> > Christopher Wright Wrote:
>> >
>> >> Walter Bright wrote:
>> >> > Christopher Wright wrote:
>> >> >> A number of modules in phobos/internal are marked public domain. 
>> >> >> Are
>> >> >> you asking for Tango's internals to be placed in the public domain?
>> >> >> That also is a bit much to ask.
>> >> >
>> >> > Why is it a bit much to ask?
>> >>
>> >> The BSD license allows anyone to do anything with the work as long as
>> >> the authors get proper recognition. The one incentive to distribute 
>> >> the
>> >> work is this recognition (besides encouraging others to help with the
>> >> project).
>> >>
>> >> If you're not going to take any Tango code and claim that it is yours,
>> >> then the BSD license shouldn't cause any problems for you. If you
>> >> require public domain, that implies that the BSD license causes 
>> >> problems
>> >> for you. That implies that you're going to steal code.
>> >
>> > you're not following what walt says eh. his problem is not he wanna 
>> > steal
>> > and get away with it. problem is that he doesn't wanna be accused of
>> > stealing. poop man. he got accused before even lookin' at the gorram
>> > thing. also his problem is not he doesn't wanna acknowledge whodunit. i
>> > grepped around phobos and there's many names in there. there's even a 
>> > guy
>> > whos name is in there tho all his stuff has been rewritten since.
>> >
>> > what walt wanna is look at tango without fear that some dood will cry 
>> > he
>> > stole his code. after all there's only this many ways you can do 
>> > trivial
>> > sh... stuff like async i/o and logging and containers. slander comes
>> > easily and goes not so easily. is he paranoid? sure as hell he is. oh,
>> > wait. some dood _did_ cry walt stole (thru brad) his precious soon as 
>> > they
>> > was within a hundred miles. all this while walt is known to give credit
>> > down to the dog pooping in the driveway walt was looking at when he 
>> > came
>> > with an idea. give me an intercoursing break.
>>
>> The problem is, there is never a guarantee of that.  Joe Shmoe can come
>> along and claim that he works with Sean and Sean stole all his D Thread 
>> code
>> and gave it to tango.  Now, even though the entire Tango team has given
>> permission to Walter, he is still in trouble.
>
> do you want us to participate in a dialog. or revel in improbable 
> possibilities. this is a red herring.

I'm glad you see the futility in it :)  I was going off of the messages that 
said that the owners of the runtime gave permission, but for some reason 
Walter still refused to look at the runtime package that Sean sent.  What I 
read in other messages (yes, I've read every one, except for the rant on 
copyrights and pirating) is that he accepts that Sean (and others) gave 
permission, but it's possible that some of the other Tango devs had a hand 
in the runtime (even though they don't claim authorship), and so he wants 
the permission of ALL the Tango devs.  Sounds a little extreme to me, so I 
pointed out that this issue is not black and white.  There is a risk 
associated with it, and I believe Tango devs have minimized the risk, while 
still protecting their rights as developers for code Walter doesn't need.

>> The answer is, either Walter accepts that Sean (and others who gave
>> permission) are the rightful owners of the Tango runtime, and he has
>> permission to use it, or Walter is so paranoid that he trusts nobody who
>> says they own code, and he doesn't use it.  He needs to have some faith 
>> that
>> the person who says they own the code actually does.
>
> i gather you don't quite read all messages. walt don't want to deliver a 
> compiler with code he can't control. he must deliver code he can change. 
> if that code works with tango walt must know what he gotta do. to do so he 
> must look at tango. sean is cool with that. kris and lars "mi" ivar arent.

You gather incorrectly.  You also have not understood that Tango is split 
into runtime and user code.  Walter needs to look at the Tango-runtime code, 
not Tango-user code.  And for that, he has the permission he needs (from 
Sean).  He doesn't need permission from Kris and Lars because they don't 
modify the runtime code.

And nobody is claiming that Walter can't control the Tango code that he 
uses.  Without any extra permission, I can copy the Tango code, and modify 
it to my hearts content, release it in binary and source form till the day I 
die, as long as I give the original authors credit.  I think Walter 
understands that view as he has the SAME REQUIREMENTS on Phobos.

What I have understood from the messages is that he does not want to look at 
tango in case he (in the future) writes something similar to the tango code 
without realizing it, and gets blamed for copyright infringement.  If he 
only looks at the runtime code, he shouldn't have anything to worry about.

>
>> >> I don't believe that you would do so. But by requiring Tango to be
>> >> placed in the public domain, you're allowing everyone else to do so.
>> >
>> > he didn't require tango to be placed in the public domain. he asked for
>> > the same deal he gave to tango. actually he didn't even ask. he just
>> > mentioned what it takes for him to look at the code.
>>
>> I agree with you on this, but the fact still remains that Walter is not 
>> safe
>> as soon as he looks at any code, no matter who says they wrote it, unless 
>> he
>> himself wrote it.  I think this is taking it a little too extreme.
>
> yeah, ur interpretation. that's extreme.

It's just a possibility, not what I think is likely :)  In anything like 
this, there is always *some* risk.  That is what I was trying to convey.

>> >> >> The BSD license is simply public domain with attribution.
>> >> >
>> >> > No, it is not. Public Domain code is not copyrighted and does not
>> >> > require a license.
>> >>  >
>> >> >> So what is the issue with using it? Phobos already uses it. Just 
>> >> >> with
>> >> >> your name as the copyright holder.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Or do you want an agreement to allow relicensing of Phobos and 
>> >> >> Tango,
>> >> >> let's say to incompatible licenses, and still allow Phobos and 
>> >> >> Tango
>> >> >> to share code afterward?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's unclear what you want or need that you don't already have.
>> >> >
>> >> > The problems are two:
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. Phobos has already been accused of stealing code from Tango.
>> >> > Therefore, I would like explicit permission from the Tango team. I 
>> >> > am
>> >> > not going to take code from Tango and put it in Phobos without 
>> >> > explicit
>> >> > permission from the Tango team. Any hint of Phobos not having a 
>> >> > clean
>> >> > legal pedigree will impair its adoption.
>> >>
>> >> The BSD license is explicit permission. Or do you intend to 
>> >> redistribute
>> >> Tango code without proper attribution?
>> >
>> > no. he just wants to escape the tyranny of slander. he's just worried 
>> > that
>> > a tyrangot will _claim_ walt redistributed tango code without proper
>> > attribution.
>>
>> The owners have given him permission, and promised not to slander.
>
> now i am sure u read every other message in this thread. go back and 
> read'em all.

No need, I remember everything :)

>>  Anyone
>> who cries foul after the rightful owners have given permission is full of
>> crap, and I will be the first to say so.
>
> no permission was given. do you like me post drunk sometimes.

Quote from Sean: "As the author of this code, I've long since given my 
permission.  I
believe that's all that's necessary."

Quote from Walter: "In order for Phobos to move towards compatibility, I 
need a reciprocal
statement from the Tango team. The Tango license does not allow this,
and I try to be very careful in making sure Phobos is clean from a legal
standpoint.

Sean and Don have been most generous in offering such"

Which should be enough.  Sean is the owner of the code he needs, nobody else 
on the Tango team owns the runtime code.  Sean has even sent Walter a 
package file with the code he owns which (quote from Walter): "is probably 
sufficient to get compatibility, in which
case that is plenty good enough."

So it looks like he has what he needs legally and technically to get it 
done.  I might be wrong, but his recent posts sound like he is now satisfied 
with what he has.

>>  So long as Walter and co. just
>> look at the proper files (the ones with the permission).  Hell, I don't 
>> care
>> if he looks at all of tango, as long as he either doesn't copy the code, 
>> or
>> if he does, obeys the license requirements.
>
> _you_ don't care. others can't wait. they cried foul as soon as there was 
> potential code could've been copied. gorramit. at least if there was da 
> momma of all code. but it's java containers net stack log4j etc. just how 
> many ways could log4j be in d.

I wasn't here for that.  I don't know what was said or who said it, but 
there is a history of Phobos/Tango bad blood that I really am not a part of, 
and can't really comment on.  All I can say is that, although the wounds 
seem to still exist, the two parties both seem interested in resolving this 
problem.

And there is a huge investment of time and energy into Tango.  The 
developers have every right to ensure that nobody else claims they wrote it. 
I don't think Walter needs blanket permission to circumvent that.

>
>> I don't think any Tango devs are waiting to jump on Walter at the first
>> chance Phobos is compatible with Tango.  I think everyone in Tango is
>> interested in having Phobos and Tango compatible.
>
> would be great but don't quite look like it. why don't u do some homework 
> and read messages. i took 2 days. then talk.

I read as they come in, and respond as I read.  You are completely wrong if 
you think the Tango people don't want this resolved.

-Steve