SDK Question: Developing FOSS Projects on MOS 2.0
  • Caterpillar
    Caterpillar
    Posts: 37 from 2008/7/4
    From: Germany
    I wonder if it's possible to develop FOSS (Free Open Source Software) projects on MorphOS 2.0.

    If I want to develop a shared library as a FOSS project, is it possible? Can I base my work on any of the library skeletons from the SDK, and open-source it? Or do I have to omit files required to build the library? (EDIT: To compile the library, the SDK would still be required; I'm referring to the files required to build the binary of the library itself.)

    I'm posting this here, because I need an answer quickly.

    [ Edited by voyager2007 on 2008/7/21 22:52 ]
  • »21.07.08 - 22:46
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    itix
    Posts: 1520 from 2003/2/24
    From: Finland
    Of course you can.
    1 + 1 = 3 with very large values of 1
  • »21.07.08 - 23:20
    Profile
  • Caterpillar
    Caterpillar
    Posts: 37 from 2008/7/4
    From: Germany
    OK, thanks, just wanted to be absolutely sure, because of the SDK license. :-)
  • »22.07.08 - 10:12
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    I suppose we should put some text there to make it clear, but basically our intention with the skeletons/examples is that you can do with them whatever you wish for MorphOS stuff (more or less PD), but if you want to use the code for anything else the copyright applies and you should ask for permission...

    The same goes for the separately uploaded nixskeleton BTW, which might be a more useful example for most libraries (more comments and more features (you can remove those you don't need)).

    - CISC
  • »22.07.08 - 13:32
    Profile
  • Caterpillar
    Caterpillar
    Posts: 37 from 2008/7/4
    From: Germany
    I want to create native, MorphOS, open-source libraries. If I include the build files (modified to the specific library), can I publish them? And which license can I apply to the build files?

    For instance, I want to port a BSD library, which comes with a BSD license. Do I have to omit, or add, the names of the library skeleton creators? If I add the names of the library skeleton creators to the BSD license, it makes the files and technique for building the library open-source.

    I would like to make the source code of the build environment (modified skeleton files) available, so that other people can make changes to the library and recompile it.

    If I would omit the build-environment files, no-one can make changes to the library.

    So, what kind of mention would you like, "based on library skeleton written by XYZ" or a full-blown "MorphOS Library Skeleton Copyright (C) XYZ", or no mention at all? And if you wish to retain your copyright, can I add it to the BSD license? (Or into other licenses?)

    That's a very important issue.

    I need a clarification to avoid future complaints.

    For now, I'll add a clause:

    All parts pertaining to MorphOS library skeleton files may only be used for creating MorphOS software. All other uses are subject to clarification with the respective copyright holders.

    into the BSD license, and

    Based on library skeleton ABC, Copyright (C) by XYZ. All rights reserved. See LICENSE.txt for further information.

    at the beginning of every file from the library skeleton. If that's not okay with you, let me know.

    And what do I do with GNU licensed software? The GNU license requires that the result be open-sourced and that it cannot be put under a more restrictive license (which would prohibit the clause mentioned above). So, for GNU software, I would use two licenses, one for the build files, which would follow above mentioned scheme, and the GNU license for the core source files of the project.

    Or is it possible to omit all mentioning of the skeleton code? After all, most likely, most of the code will be modified anyway beyond recognition. And the SDK would still be required to compile it.

    Such issues should certainly be documented somewhere in the SDK to avoid confusion, and give developers a clear legal environment to work in.


    [ Edited by voyager2007 on 2008/7/22 21:53 ]
  • »22.07.08 - 14:09
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    Quote:

    Or is it possible to omit all mentioning of the skeleton code? After all, most likely, most of the code will be modified anyway beyond recognition. And the SDK would still be required to compile it.


    Well, the examples are there to make your life easy, so whatever you do is atleast fine by me (and probably the others too), the point was just that it's there to help MorphOS developers code for MorphOS, not so some jerk can rip off some bit of code and claim it as their own.

    If you add the copyrights of everyone to the BSD license, great, if you don't that's fine too, though you might at least add a mention in the relevant files as reference for future code-reviewers...

    Quote:

    Such issues should certainly be documented somewhere in the SDK to avoid confusion, and give developers a clear legal environment to work in.


    Yes, you are right, I'll see if I can think up something for the upcoming SDK update... :P


    - CISC
  • »23.07.08 - 13:14
    Profile
  • Caterpillar
    Caterpillar
    Posts: 37 from 2008/7/4
    From: Germany
    Thank you! :)
  • »23.07.08 - 14:34
    Profile