Embedded designer

[dsiders]

And *poof*... back to regularly scheduled programming.

[hnb]

PS: I think I already asking before, back in 2013 to make KZDesktop included in Lazarus in this forum, and nobody cares.

This is not true. KZDesktop was interesting technical lecture and was inspiration for me for Sparta project. I learned from you many things. Sparta has some spirit from KZDesktop, and today Sparta is part of Lazarus.

[AFFRIZA 亜風実]

I learned from you many things. Sparta has some spirit from KZDesktop

Hold on. I'm not the author.

But yeah, that time I asked for that in this forum. That things makes me a not satisfied are the answers I got, "why are you not using f12 to switch forms, whatever...", and the most insulted one I think, "So, what the poDesigned used for if we are using single window designer". That's so irritating.

But, what makes me feels so ironic is... Why that time no one to backport that, and suddenly want to backporting PL's package which is have an ambiguous license. That time KZDesktop was a perfect candidate, it's an opensource project and it's a LGPL license. This is so weird.

And... I am a big fan of New Pascal, sadly the project looks suspended maybe?

[Handoko]

Maybe manpower issue. The more people get involved the better the software will be, including the customer service, documentation, public relation, etc. I feel the forum has more active users now compare to some years ago, am I wrong?

[kupferstecher]

they are GPL licensed because they are part of your Lazarus fork which is GPL licensed.
That is how GPL works.

I'm not sure if its that easy in legal terms. If he did a copyright violation, that doesn't mean that his changes are free to everyone. It probably depends on (each) national legislation. This is even more if the original code comes from a third party.

[JuhaManninen]

they are GPL licensed because they are part of your Lazarus fork which is GPL licensed.
That is how GPL works.

I'm not sure if its that easy in legal terms. If he did a copyright violation, that doesn't mean that his changes are free to everyone. It probably depends on (each) national legislation. This is even more if the original code comes from a third party.

Well, I was told the same thing by others. Even if somebody violates a license by leaving the license headers out, I should not add them by myself. It should go through an official legal process.
Another complication:
GPL code "taints" or "infects" any new code linked to it ... but what if there are no linked binaries? What if only sources with a build script are delivered?
I believe the license has been explained and clarified for interpreted languages etc. but anyway it creates an extra complication.

[coliv_aja]

If I'm not mistaken pl_glassdock actually kzdesktop, the license should following it. I used to compare their source years back. But they did good job maintaining it with recent lazarus.

[JuhaManninen]

But, what makes me feels so ironic is... Why that time no one to backport that, and suddenly want to backporting PL's package which is have an ambiguous license. That time KZDesktop was a perfect candidate, it's an opensource project and it's a LGPL license. This is so weird.

What steps did you take to integrate KZDesktop to Lazarus?
Did you offer patches?
Or did you just tell other people to do the work for you because you say so?
That is not how open source works. Basically all developers scratch their own itches. There are thousands of missing features and bugs to work on. Nobody is paid to work on them, except for some one-time bounties for a specific task.

I personally supported backporting the CT form editor for 2 reasons:
1. I heard it works while the Sparta editor does not.
2. I wanted to make people realize the principle of FOSS development. Copy, modify and spread shamelessly. That is the essence of GPL.

Number 2 didn't end well. The reaction from Sternas was a surprise and disappointment for me of course.
How did we come into this situation? I remember many years ago Sternas was on this forum discussing and answering questions. Many people praised improvement in CT compared to Lazarus. There was a sense of healthy competition. I believe they had some omitted or altered copyright texts also then but there was no war around the issue.
Suddenly the atmosphere changed. People started to attack them and call them names. There were false accusations. They allegedly removed license texts from Lazarus+LCL and 3rd party components. It was a lie. I finally checked their Lazarus+LCL fork and some other components. All license headers were intact.
Some people explained they break the license because they don't offer their changes back to Lazarus as patches. GPL has no such rule in reality.
Some people admitted they follow the license but they are morally wrong. WTF!!!
What triggered this avalanche? Mostly it was the blogs of one Norwegian person. People respected him because he is a good programmer and he can write well to agitate people. Most of his claims were lies. I remember one "there is an international law to have a Subversion server". No there isn't.
He didn't have any own code to protect from Pilot Logic, he just enjoyed seeing people fight a war after he manipulated them. (Actually he claimed his code was stolen but refused to give details...)
This all proved something about a human nature. A FOSS license clearly gives too much freedom, people started to pull new "amendments" from their hats for it. Most people didn't check facts but just repeated accusations from other people.

Unfortunately Pilot Logic was guilty of some removed or changed copyright texts. A copyright and a license are two different things but copyright is very important because a copyright holder can define and change the license.
I understood there are still some omissions and border cases like changing "Lazarus Developers Team" into "Typhon Developers Team" in copyright.

The latest form editor episode ... I am not sure if their own license is legal because of some loophole in GPL text, and honestly I don't care. I have better things to do. The attitude of Sternas is clearly caused by all mudslinging he and his company got. He blames Lazarus people because some people claimed they represent Lazarus.

[winni]

Hi!

Thanx. That is part of the info I needed - because I did not know about the whole struggle.

That is the way - and not deleting my messages and pretending that it is spam!

Thanx again.

Winni

[mercurhyo]

Lazarus and CT are TWO excellent programing tools.

as long as they 'worked together' more or less, I used them both. The troubles have, even if they came from stupid people not working at one of the teams, to my opinion, begun when CT started to change files extensions to somehow break compatibility in 'facade'. So that would have give clues to you @JuhaManninen, around what had happen with @Sternas, years ago.
That said. Such a war could have no effect in C BIG world, but it kicks hard, I bet, in Pascal world.
There is two ways to stop that war, I guess.

1) the teams talk together and find a way to work BOTH TOGETHER at Pascal world.

2) Each team makes their own improvements, with adapted licenses for the other team to NOT GRAB THEM

at the 1st case, all is going to peacefuly retrive order.

at the 2nd case, CT is SIMPLY going to die, because it is based on the other major team, which drives the largest Pascal community over the Galaxy (and implicitely gives the 'standard' way to move on, about improvements).

Have a nice reflection, Sirs!

Back to my beer! Cheers!

(signed by gulyone)

[AFFRIZA 亜風実]

The attitude of Sternas is clearly caused by all mudslinging he and his company got. He blames Lazarus people because some people claimed they represent Lazarus.

So, who claimed they represent Lazarus? Me? Did I say so? Did they say so? Take one screenshot, post that here! When did I claim I am a part of the Lazarus team? Who has a false accusation?

Did I don't over a patch at that time? Most of the fix I do, I send it here or stored in my Github page (because I don't know how pull and whatever, mostly I just recommit by deleting all files and replace it), because why? I'm not really an advanced programmer that understands a whole LCL, SVN or whatever, I'm just casual hobbyist, I don't even have any degree. Just the same as I do with other components. If I have a patch, I'll send it here. If it does not apply to the stable Lazarus, I'll use it for myself. I even over new Lazarus icon collections a long time ago? But how this community reacts? So, the causes of CT exists and doing those things, who? Just an outsider of the Lazarus Team?

That's how you react to a new contributor joining, huh?
That's no wonder there a something like a project Sparta and New Pascal.

[coliv_aja]

Not to mean to offend anyone. But, simply from my experience pilotlogic had no will to make the conversation. I used to ask in their forum if they can send a patch of their improvement to fpc bugtracker. Their answer was "codetypon and its source is property of pilotlogic", something along that line and banned me. Since then I never wanted to deal with them anymore.
There's obviously a language barrier. I don't know where they're coming from but there seems to some different understanding of what FOSS is. I just simply unable to understand their logic.

Lazarus and CT are TWO excellent programing tools.

as long as they 'worked together' more or less, I used them both. The troubles have, even if they came from stupid people not working at one of the teams, to my opinion, begun when CT started to change files extensions to somehow break compatibility in 'facade'. So that would have give clues to you @JuhaManninen, around what had happen with @Sternas, years ago.
That said. Such a war could have no effect in C BIG world, but it kicks hard, I bet, in Pascal world.
There is two ways to stop that war, I guess.

1) the teams talk together and find a way to work BOTH TOGETHER at Pascal world.

2) Each team makes their own improvements, with adapted licenses for the other team to NOT GRAB THEM

at the 1st case, all is going to peacefuly retrive order.

at the 2nd case, CT is SIMPLY going to die, because it is based on the other major team, which drives the largest Pascal community over the Galaxy (and implicitely gives the 'standard' way to move on, about improvements).

Have a nice reflection, Sirs!

Back to my beer! Cheers!

(signed by gulyone)

[Otto]

Hi Dio Affriza.

The attitude of Sternas is clearly caused by all mudslinging he and his company got. He blames Lazarus people because some people claimed they represent Lazarus.

So, who claimed they represent Lazarus? Me? Did I say so? Did they say so? Take one screenshot, post that here! When did I claim I am a part of the Lazarus team? Who has a false accusation?

Did I don't over a patch at that time? Most of the fix I do, I send it here or stored in my Github page (because I don't know how pull and whatever, mostly I just recommit by deleting all files and replace it), because why? I'm not really an advanced programmer that understands a whole LCL, SVN or whatever, I'm just casual hobbyist, I don't even have any degree. Just the same as I do with other components. If I have a patch, I'll send it here. If it does not apply to the stable Lazarus, I'll use it for myself. I even over new Lazarus icon collections a long time ago? But how this community reacts? So, the causes of CT exists and doing those things, who? Just an outsider of the Lazarus Team?

That's how you react to a new contributor joining, huh?
That's no wonder there a something like a project Sparta and New Pascal.

From what I could read in the forum, I can say that JuhaManninen is a very correct and respectful person of others. I don't think he turned directly to you. Also note that he is very committed to maintaining the development of Lazarus. From the way you write, I think you, like me, are not native English speakers. Keep in mind that it can be very easy to misunderstand especially the world when writing in a foreign language.   
Da quello che ho potuto leggere nel forum, posso affermare che JuhaManninen è una persona molto corretta e rispettosa degli altri. Non credo si rivolgesse direttamente a te. Tieni inoltre conto che è molto impegnato nel mantenere lo sviluppo di Lazarus. Da come scrivi credo che tu, come me, non sia madrelingua inglese. Inoltre considera che può essere molto facile fraintendersi in particolar mondo quando si scrive in una lingua straniera.   

Otto.

[kupferstecher]

Last year I was looking for a designer component to integrate in my application and I was recommended to have a look at the JEDI designer and the designer pl_exDesign included in the CT components. The JEDI component comes with MPL licence, the CT component comes with its own proprietary licence.

See below screenshots to get an idea how "similar" both components are.

The MPL allows changes in the source code but requires the licence to stay unchanged.
Now although this is not given here, it isn't necessarily a copy right violation, as the CT-component may be based on a version which was licenced differently or if CT has the permission by the copyright holder. The CT guy could even be the original author.
I'm not involved in that component so from outside I don't have any insight into this.

But IF it is an copyright violation, then by providing the pl_ExDesign package in the online package manager presumably would be a copyright violation as well (as there are hints for it). And this is where Lazarus gets involved, just by hosting. Even if its no copyright violation by CT, then the hosting still seems to mean a violation of the CT-licence.

[wp]

I think pl_ExDesign should be removed from OPM since the "original" port is included in one of the JVCL packages which is under our control. And JVCL is available in OPM as well.