English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Dynamically evaluating OCaml code
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-14 (07:30)
From: Brandon J. Van Every <vanevery@i...>
Subject: [Caml-list] BSD vs. GPL
Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > I am not interested in Free Software as in 'free beer', I
> > am interested
> > as in 'free speech'.  And FWIW I'm on the MIT/BSD side of
> > the debate.
> The primary motivation for much free software *is* FSF-style
> idealism.

True.  And I can't stand those people.

> It is
> not reasonable to expect to reap the benefits of this idealism while
> contradicting its values.

Nonsense.  Read again: "I am on the MIT/BSD side of the debate," as are
MANY open source projects.

> All I hear is "gimme, gimme" when non-free software
> developers ask for MIT/BSD
> and LGPL licenses.  I am a non-free software developer
> myself, so don't think I don't see from that perspective.

Idealists think the programmer is supposed to contribute massive amounts
of time and money for the betterment of all mankind.  (Remember, time ==
money.)  Pragmatists think the individual should contribute very little,
and that the value of Open Source should come from the collective
accumulation of very small contributions.  To a pragmatist, this is
economically rational.  We think the idealists are extremely silly
people with way too much time (and hence money) on their hands.  Views
change a lot when you're blowing your own money, not someone else's.

> > > When you look to other languages: There are often
> > > commercial interests
> > > behind ports to Windows (e.g. ActiveState). I don't think
> > > the O'Caml market is ready for such a thing.
> >
> > Things don't get ready by waiting around for others to act.
> > People who want to get it ready, are what get it ready.
> Well said.  It is telling that there is noone who wants to
> get it ready, considering Windows' market share.

Get what ready, OCaml package managers that work on Windows?  I
certainly want to get it ready, but it's a question of rational labor

A far better strategy for me, for now, is to put my attention into The
Nebula Device.  It has a very nice Windows build procedure that has
nothing to do with OCaml, and it doesn't employ a bunch of open source
dependencies needing package management.  Even if it did, it's got
plenty of Windows-centric slave labor behind it.  Simply put, for 3D
game stuff, it is a more effective organizational body than anything the
OCaml world has to offer.  (BSD project BTW. ;-)

Adding OCaml to Nebula is a modest project.  My pressing need for OCaml
package management only comes *after* undertaking that project.  And who
knows, maybe I'll mostly be writing original code than bothering with
anyone else's crufty code.  I don't know where future game projects will
lead me.

So, if nobody else is interested in OCaml package management on Windows
for now, don't be surprised that I don't volunteer to be the first upon
the sacrificial altar.  I only do things on an as-needed basis.  I'd be
happy to help if others have similar needs though.

Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.643 / Virus Database: 411 - Release Date: 3/25/2004

To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners