[phobos] Tango and the new time lib

[Sean Kelly]

It doesn't hold any water, but it's not worth risking the legal hassle  
to prove it.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 29, 2010, at 8:09 AM, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad  
<lars at kyllingen.net> wrote:

> I agree, and I also find their claim rather strange.  I don't think  
> they
> can prevent others from creating code with a similar interface to
> theirs.  (If that were the case, the Wine and Mono devs would be in  
> big
> trouble.)
>
> So that leaves the code.  Unless SHOO has copy-pasted the code from
> Tango, I cannot see how their claim holds any water.  There are only  
> so
> many ways to figure out which day of the month it is.
>
> -Lars
>
>
> On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 07:52 -0700, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> That's effing ridiculous.  The D community could really do without
>> this kind of behavior.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2010, at 7:38 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One of the Tango developers called me today. There are 5 developers
>>> of the Tango time library, and they feel that the Phobos time lib
>>> submission is close enough to theirs to be considered an
>>> infringement on their license. The Tango license is the BSD license,
>>> which does not permit others changing the license, such as to Boost
>>> which is the Phobos license.
>>>
>>> I am not qualified to compare the two source code bases and make a
>>> legal determination if there is infringement or not. And quite
>>> frankly, I don't want to split legal hairs about it against the
>>> Tango developers' wishes. I've invited the Tango devs to subscribe
>>> to this mailing list, and I hope we can come to a resolution:
>>>
>>> 1. I think the best solution would be for Tango to relicense the
>>> time module under the Boost license, which would require the
>>> agreement of the five time module developers. Then, the Phobos
>>> version would include them as authors and they'd share in the
>>> copyright.
>>>
>>> 2. Next would be if the Tango developers who do agree to the Boost
>>> license would identify their contributions, those would get
>>> authorship & copyright credit, etc. Tango developers who do not
>>> agree would identify code they consider infringing, and that code
>>> would be removed from the Phobos version, and possibly reimplemented
>>> by someone who has not looked at the Tango version.
>>>
>>>
>>> The bottom line is the Tango devs should get the final say on what
>>> is infringing and what isn't, and we won't relicense infringing code
>>> into Phobos without their explicit permission.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos mailing list
>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos