View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
hduregger
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 11
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
aldacron
Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 1322 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've considered Newton before, but the fact that it had an installer for the SDK (which I find rather annoying, but not a deal breaker) led me to put it off. Also, I'm not comfortable with the fact that it's not open source. And I really didn't like the license they have.
Granted, OpenGL/AL are not open source, but they are open standards with both open and closed source implementations. If I decide one day to provide a bundle of shared libraries for all of the Derelict bindings (something under consideration), the Newton license seems to prohibit me from distributing that project's binaries except as part of an application. Even if I were to get permission to do so today, nothing is stopping the project owner from changing his mind tomorrow. That's why I'd really prefer to keep Derelict focused on open source projects.
I did read the thread you linked and saw where Julio said "you can use Newton as you wish." But that's irrelevant. What matters is what's in the license. If Newton 2.0 is released under a less restrictive license, I'll consider adding a binding to the trunk even if it's still closed source. In the meantime, feel free to add links for any Derelictified Newton bindings on the Derelict Wiki.
hduregger wrote: | Maybe we could get this into the trunk, as it seems to be compatible with the requirements |
I've rejected several bindings that meet all the criteria listed there. The purpose of those points is that bindings that meet them have a better chance of getting into the trunk than those that don't. But it's by no means an exhaustive list nor is it set in stone. I'm very, very conservative when it comes to adding new bindings. _________________ The One With D | The One With Aldacron | D Bits |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hduregger
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 11
|
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you for this insightful explanation.
I have to admit I rushed this all a bit without getting back to ajung about this proposal and also didn't really think about Newton's beta state. The excitement made me jump too early. Sorry about that. I just wanted to have more options in D than is currently obvious. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aldacron
Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 1322 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
hduregger wrote: | Thank you for this insightful explanation.
I have to admit I rushed this all a bit without getting back to ajung about this proposal and also didn't really think about Newton's beta state. The excitement made me jump too early. Sorry about that. I just wanted to have more options in D than is currently obvious. |
It's not a big deal. The thing to keep in mind about these bindings is that it doesn't matter if they are in the Derelict trunk or not. It doesn't make a binding 'more official'. Regular announcements about releases and updates of a binding in the D newsgroup will suffice for exposure. The only major difference between a binding that's in the trunk and one that's not is that the onus is on me to maintain the former. As long as it is outside of the trunk, it's not my responsibility.
So anyone who doesn't mind the Newton license and doesn't mind implementing and maintaining a Derelictified binding to the library is free to use the DerelictUtil package to do so. The existence and availability of the binding would be another positive for the D community. As long as people are made aware of it, it doesn't lose anything by not being part of the Derelict trunk, IMO. _________________ The One With D | The One With Aldacron | D Bits |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|