Re: [LAD] Aeolus

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Fons Adriaensen <fons@...>
Cc: Linux Audio Users <linux-audio-user@...>, Linux Audio Developers <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - 9:29 pm

--001a11c2d6a04bc43b04e6af2072
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> Hello all,

Respectfully, you granted people the right to fork your code in the first
place. Now you say you might take this right away, but why? How has it
harmed you or anyone else? Why should you have been notified that a fork
took place? The whole point of free software is that people can adapt it to
their needs and share their changes with those with similar needs. If those
forks are better suited to the task at hand than your original code, then
people may well use them (and that's a good thing!). If your new release is
better, people may well use that. Isn't that the point? To help people?
Plus, if the forks did/do make any improvements that you value, hey, that's
great merge them, not that I think you'd ever do that ;-)

We can't all be all things to everybody all the time. The value of your
projects isn't necessarily in the complete package with your name on it. If
someone takes your engine and slaps a new interface on it that people like
better, well, they still use your engine, right? It's hard to put your ego
aside sometimes, but I really recommend that you do. You've contributed a
lot to Linux Audio and I'd hate to see that ruined by bruised egos and
non-free licenses.

--001a11c2d6a04bc43b04e6af2072
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Fons Adriaensen =
<fons@linuxaudi=
o.org
> wrote:
Hello all,

It has come to my attention that there are ATM at least two
'forks' of Aeolus. The first by the MuseScore team, the second
by one Maurizio Gavioli.

Neither of them even had the decency to let me know of their
work, and both are taking Aeolus in a direction I do not
approve of. Gavioli has even added his 'copyright' to the
sources of the libraries that Aeolus depends on but which
are not part of its source distribution. Apparently the
intention is to release incompatible versions of those as
well.

If this is typical for the attitude taken by the Linux Audio
community then my motivation to contribute to it will take
a serious blow.

As announced previously, there will be a fully reworked
release of Aeolus next year (on the occasion of its 10th
birthday). Apart from major improvements to the audio code
it will be completely OSC controlled. None of this will be
compatible with the forks of course, they'll find themselves
instantly obsolete. And I will make sure that this sort of
thing won't happen again, even if that means a more restrictive
license.

Ciao,
Respectfully, you granted people the right to fork y=
our code in the first place. Now you say you might take this right away, bu=
t why? How has it harmed you or anyone else? Why should you have been notif=
ied that a fork took place? The whole point of free software is that people=
can adapt it to their needs and share their changes with those with simila=
r needs. If those forks are better suited to the task at hand than your ori=
ginal code, then people may well use them (and that's a good thing!). I=
f your new release is better, people may well use that. Isn't that the =
point? To help people? Plus, if the forks did/do make any improvements that=
you value, hey, that's great merge them, not that I think you'd ev=
er do that ;-)
We can't all be all things to everybody all the time. Th=
e value of your projects isn't necessarily in the complete package with=
your name on it. If someone takes your engine and slaps a new interface on=
it that people like better, well, they still use your engine, right? It&#3=
9;s hard to put your ego aside sometimes, but I really recommend that you d=
o. You've contributed a lot to Linux Audio and I'd hate to see that=
ruined by bruised egos and non-free licenses.

--001a11c2d6a04bc43b04e6af2072--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAD] Aeolus, Fons Adriaensen, (Wed Sep 18, 9:16 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, James Morris, (Thu Sep 19, 2:36 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Ralf Mardorf, (Fri Sep 20, 12:55 am)
Re: [LAD] [LAU] Aeolus, Julien Claassen, (Wed Sep 18, 10:02 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, J. Liles, (Wed Sep 18, 9:29 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Fons Adriaensen, (Wed Sep 18, 10:29 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Thu Sep 19, 3:31 am)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, IOhannes m zmoelnig, (Thu Sep 19, 2:50 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Thu Sep 19, 3:18 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, IOhannes m zmoelnig, (Thu Sep 19, 3:50 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Thu Sep 19, 4:57 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, IOhannes m zmölnig, (Thu Sep 19, 8:48 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Thu Sep 19, 7:00 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Sep 19, 3:36 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Thu Sep 19, 5:07 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Sep 20, 3:58 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, hermann meyer, (Fri Sep 20, 4:51 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Gene Heskett, (Thu Sep 19, 3:14 pm)
Re: [LAD] [LAU] Aeolus, Rafael Vega, (Wed Sep 18, 10:40 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Nils Gey, (Wed Sep 18, 9:36 pm)
Re: [LAD] Aeolus, Dan Muresan, (Wed Sep 18, 9:46 pm)