Page 1 of 1
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:15 pm
by Julf
sbgk wrote:I think we are all worrying about someone who we all recognise is a major force in the world of hifi, he has helped by pointing out that source code needs to be provided (which I'll rectify)
Thank you - looking forward to stydying (and learning from) your code!
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:35 pm
by sbgk
Julf wrote:sbgk wrote:I think we are all worrying about someone who we all recognise is a major force in the world of hifi, he has helped by pointing out that source code needs to be provided (which I'll rectify)
Thank you - looking forward to stydying (and learning from) your code!
JULF
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:10 pm
by cristianr
It is quite weird that most of you people think that providing only binaries in softwares whose license explicitly require providing the source code (as GPL) is ok and no harm is done. This is wrong and harm is done. If everybody would do the same this forum possibly would not exist as the software behind is open source. And the whole internet would not be as it is.
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:17 pm
by Aleg
cristianr wrote:It is quite weird that most of you people think that providing only binaries in softwares whose license explicitly require providing the source code (as GPL) is ok and no harm is done. This is wrong and harm is done. If everybody would do the same this forum possibly would not exist as the software behind is open source. And the whole internet would not be as it is.
ChristianR
Why did you just register to begin this discussion?
I'm personally not waiting for people like you to come into this thread.
If you want to discuss these things please open another thread, so I can ignore your postings.
Cheers
Aleg
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:37 pm
by Fran
Guys, discussion of the the open availability of the source code for various players etc is indeed interesting but however, belongs in a separate thread. So if you want to have further discussion on this (very valid imho) point about making available the source code for open source based projects, then please start another thread.
Fran
Is sbgk's version of the squeezelite violating copyright?
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:05 am
by Julf
This topic was deeped to be off-topic in the MQn thread, and it was suggested that I start a separate thread for this discussion.
Seems Gordon (sbgk) of MQn fame has produced a "new" player by copying and slightly modifying the squeezelite player, written by Adrian Smith (Triode).
Adrian has very kindly licensed his software using the GPLv3 (
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html), thus stating that he is happy with people using, studying, modifying and changing his code - but with a small proviso that the modifications should be made available to others on the same terms. Not respecting that would constitute a violation of the copyright license terms.
So far I have not seen any information about the availability of the source code for the modifications sbgk has made to Adrian's program. I am sure I am not the only one who would like to be able to study sbgk's modifications in the same spirit of open source that Adrian's software displays - after all, if Adran hadn't made his source code available, sbgk wouldn't have been able to produce his own version of it.
Re: Is sbgk's version of the squeezelite violating copyright
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:28 am
by sbgk
JULF
Re: Is sbgk's version of the squeezelite violating copyright
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:30 am
by Fran
I've split out some posts from the MQN thread as requested RE making source code available as it was really OT there.
The first few posts above are out of sequence as they are the precursor to the thread being made.
As usual, lets keep it clean here OK?
Fran
Re: Is sbgk's version of the squeezelite violating copyright
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:24 pm
by Julf
Sbgk's software package now includes both Triode's source code as well as the modifications by sbgk. Many thanks!