1. Forum
  2. USENET
  3. comp.sys.acorn.programmer

  • Open Sourcing

    From druck@news@druck.org.uk to comp.sys.acorn.programmer on Sun Jun 14 13:40:13 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.acorn.programmer

    I'm thinking of open sourcing some of my RISC OS software such as
    TimerMod. As I see it there are three questions, which I'd appreciate
    your thoughts on.

    1) How to handle RISC OS file types
    2) Where to host
    3) What licence to use

    In more detail

    1) I moved to using git for all my software a while ago after previously
    using Perforce, neither of these ran on RISC OS at the time, so
    everything has been checked in and out from a Windows or Linux box on to
    a shared directory accessible to RISC OS. Sources are in c and h
    directories and other file types are in the form of filename,xxx as
    crated by either Lanman or Sunfish.

    There is now a RISC OS port of git which stores RISC OS files without
    type extensions, and applies the filetypes on checkout. I've not started
    using this yet, given that the port doesn't do ssh, so still requires a
    shared directory.

    2) I've already used GitHub for some non RISC OS projects, and know how
    to use if for merges. There is also GitLab, I've not looked at that yet, although I should do as I've signed up for access ROOL's locally hosted repository.

    The main problem with either of those at the moment is the the RISC OS
    version of git can't do SSL yet, so wont be able to access them
    directly, and I ultimately want to allow a RISC OS end to end solution.

    3) I could just slap a GPLv2 licence on everything, but does anyone have experience of other open source licences which may be more suitable? Stand-alone applications aren't such a big problem, but things like
    TimerMod which people may want to use in other applications, may need
    more thought.

    Let me know what you think.

    ---druck
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Fryatt@news@stevefryatt.org.uk to comp.sys.acorn.programmer on Sun Jun 14 14:51:21 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.acorn.programmer

    On 14 Jun, druck wrote in message
    <rc55rf$i08$1@dont-email.me>:

    1) I moved to using git for all my software a while ago after previously using Perforce, neither of these ran on RISC OS at the time, so everything has been checked in and out from a Windows or Linux box on to a shared directory accessible to RISC OS. Sources are in c and h directories and
    other file types are in the form of filename,xxx as crated by either
    Lanman or Sunfish.

    The GCCSDK version of Zip can strip and set filetypes from the ,xxx
    extensions, which is how I create my Zip archives. I store all non-text
    files with their ,xxx extension in revision control (SVN, in my case, but it shouldn't make any difference).

    It does require a host system of some sort, however: either a network FS or
    an emulated machine like RPCEmu.

    2) I've already used GitHub for some non RISC OS projects, and know how to use if for merges. There is also GitLab, I've not looked at that yet, although I should do as I've signed up for access ROOL's locally hosted repository.

    The main problem with either of those at the moment is the the RISC OS version of git can't do SSL yet, so wont be able to access them directly,
    and I ultimately want to allow a RISC OS end to end solution.

    I'm interested in thoughts on this, too. :-)

    3) I could just slap a GPLv2 licence on everything, but does anyone have experience of other open source licences which may be more suitable?

    A number of years ago, someone on the ROOL forum pointed out the EUPL v1.1, which is effectively a GPL without some of the more "exciting" clauses. I
    ended up using it for all of my Open-Sourcing, because it seemed less
    political and more pragmatic.

    One key point, though, is that it considers itself "GPLv2 compatible" -- so
    if someone wishes to use my code in a GPLv2 project they can. This means
    that I'm not forcing others to follow me in using the EUPL.

    Stand-alone applications aren't such a big problem, but things like
    TimerMod which people may want to use in other applications, may need more thought.

    There's always the OSLib approach: "if you use the source as source, it's GPLv2, but if you use it as a binary blob, you can have this more relaxed licence that we apply separately for a very specific purpose".
    --
    Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England

    http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2