ijabz: I'm just saying that those people will not pay either way. they'll settle for pirated or trial versions.
2012-11-27 33228, 2012
luks
warp: why would anybody pay for xchat?
2012-11-27 33239, 2012
luks
if there is a free and legal version from as reliable source
2012-11-27 33205, 2012
reosarevok
The main problem with xchat for windows is what hawke_1 mentioned though
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
reosarevok
Their attitude seems pretty much like "fuck all this"
2012-11-27 33256, 2012
warp
luks: we'd have to know the sales numbers for xchat for windows to know if it is a failure or not.
2012-11-27 33201, 2012
ijabz
Its not B&W, whether an individual pays depend son how much they like/need the software and how easy it is to get for free
2012-11-27 33209, 2012
luks
what started this discussion, btw?
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
ijabz
warp you are in a lucky position that you get paid to write open source software, but if everybody who used musicbrainz only wrote open source s/w I doubt there would be money to pay your wages
2012-11-27 33211, 2012
warp
ijabz: I obviously disagree with that.
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
ijabz
ocharles wondering how to license some of his haskell musicbrainz code
2012-11-27 33249, 2012
ijabz
warp, really, where do you think the money would come from then ?
2012-11-27 33228, 2012
warp
ijabz: as I said, I don't think the choice of license for most software has any significant effect on how many copies you sell.
2012-11-27 33254, 2012
MBJenkins
ianmcorvidae: MBS-5618: properly URI-escape utf8 for wikipedia extracts
2012-11-27 33205, 2012
ijabz
Have you ever tried to sell software though ?
2012-11-27 33219, 2012
warp
ijabz: not yet.
2012-11-27 33224, 2012
luks
I don't see a problem with GPL for the server code, given that there no need to incorporate it to a client application
2012-11-27 33235, 2012
warp
ijabz: the closest I've been to that is tagging along as a technical person in B2B sitations at my previous job.
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
ijabz
Actually I don't really know what ocharles code is, but doenst gpling that mean that other mb code will need to be gpled when it currently is
2012-11-27 33230, 2012
ijabz
BUt I was just expressing general dissatisfaction with gpl
2012-11-27 33207, 2012
ijabz
I originally though of GPL as a way of getting to some sort of utopia where there was lots of freely available opensrc libraries and applications available
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
ijabz
but where I diagree with warp is that you ca gel something and sell it successfully, and because you can't do that most companies will not use gpl so you don't get programming input
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
warp
ijabz: other mb code is currently GPLed
2012-11-27 33255, 2012
luks
ijabz: even FSF doesn't recommend GPL for libraries
2012-11-27 33257, 2012
nikki has not really followed the whole conversation but agrees with warp that people won't pay unless they want to
2012-11-27 33204, 2012
nikki
I use some shareware keyboard on my phone. every day it pops up to remind me. it's been doing it for a couple of years now and I still haven't paid for it
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
ijabz
but nikki, but if instead it stopped working what would you do ?
2012-11-27 33243, 2012
warp
ijabz: if you don't agree with my theory (a perfectly reasonable thing to do), i can certainly understand that the GPL is not a good fit for the kind of work you're doing.
2012-11-27 33243, 2012
nikki
use a different one
2012-11-27 33203, 2012
nikki
if all else fails, the built in one will do :P
2012-11-27 33223, 2012
warp
luks: that's not really true. the FSF recommends the GPL for everything. and only the LGPL in certain situations.
2012-11-27 33224, 2012
luks
I don't pay for applications out of principle as well
2012-11-27 33241, 2012
nikki
I have paid for things before, but only because I really like them
2012-11-27 33252, 2012
hawke_1
There are two things that I will pay for: Stuff I need to do my job, and games/hobby-related stuff.
2012-11-27 33259, 2012
luks
I've only paid for software where there is no alternative
but fortunately usually there is a good alternative that is free
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
reosarevok
Same as hawke_1, and then only on sale :p
2012-11-27 33229, 2012
nikki
reosarevok: well, we all know what you're like with money :P
2012-11-27 33248, 2012
reosarevok
Careful? :)
2012-11-27 33249, 2012
ijabz
yeah luks, nikki, so that is what Im saying , if its easy to get a free version of the soft are you like you'll just use that, if its not easy/possible then you will use something else
2012-11-27 33253, 2012
ianmcorvidae
I regularly donate to open source projects; I haven't bought software in a traditional sense in ages though
2012-11-27 33229, 2012
warp
I pay for lots of software. but if I need it for my work (whether musicbrainz or something else), I do not like to rely on something which isn't free software -- I'd still prefer to pay for it though.
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
ijabz
so making gel makes it easier to get free version, and therefore it does have an effect on whether or not you'll by a program
2012-11-27 33201, 2012
reosarevok
In most cases, it doesn't even make it easier - the pirate bay is likely to have a copy, gpl or not
2012-11-27 33210, 2012
warp
ijabz: in most cases, it wouldn't make it easier to get a free version. free versions of anything remotely popular are easy to find for the kind of people who want free stuff.
2012-11-27 33224, 2012
hawke joined the channel
2012-11-27 33241, 2012
luks
warp: you might have moral issues with pirating non-gpl software
2012-11-27 33249, 2012
luks
there is no such issue with downloading gpl software
2012-11-27 33257, 2012
luks
or at least, I don't have such an issue
2012-11-27 33212, 2012
ijabz
Its easier because someone can make a website with new software if pled and not breaking any laws
2012-11-27 33231, 2012
warp
luks: certainly. but if you have such strong ethics, I expect you would also would like to support the author by paying for it.
2012-11-27 33252, 2012
luks
warp: probably not, as I said, I don't pay for software
2012-11-27 33203, 2012
ijabz
which is different to have to trawl torrent sites
2012-11-27 33207, 2012
nikki
luks: I feel slightly guilty that I'm using textual without paying for it, because the code is open but the pre-built versions are only available if you pay :P
2012-11-27 33235, 2012
hawke_1
nikki: That seems like the best model to me…
2012-11-27 33256, 2012
warp
anyway, my views on this topic are clear. I'm obviously a free software zealot :)
2012-11-27 33254, 2012
nikki
hawke_1: I think it's pretty cool. hasn't quite worked well enough to get me to pay for it yet, but that's largely because I haven't actually bothered to figure out how
2012-11-27 33230, 2012
nikki
I seem to recall something about the app store. which is something I don't even know how to access :P
2012-11-27 33202, 2012
warp
nikki: cmd-space "appstore" ? :)
2012-11-27 33202, 2012
hawke_1
nikki: Competing with something commercial in a market full of free alternatives is hard…it’d have to be a pretty damn good IRC client to get me to pay for it and switch from Pidgin.
2012-11-27 33216, 2012
hawke_1
(I did use xchat for a while though, but the bugginess got to me)
2012-11-27 33240, 2012
reosarevok
I haven't found that many bugs in xchat?
2012-11-27 33206, 2012
nikki
I used colloquy for a long time and hated it
2012-11-27 33211, 2012
reosarevok
Have I just been very lucky?
2012-11-27 33225, 2012
nikki
textual fixed a lot of things, and demosdemon is really awesome and made me an even better version :P
2012-11-27 33226, 2012
hawke_1
reosarevok: I dunno, it was a couple of years ago that I used it a lot.
2012-11-27 33240, 2012
warp
the one thing I currently would like to pay for is a windows 8 ssh client.
2012-11-27 33252, 2012
warp
(but there doesn't seem to be one)
2012-11-27 33254, 2012
hawke_1
warp: What makes such a thing “Windows 8”?
2012-11-27 33206, 2012
warp
hawke_1: available in the windows store I mean.
2012-11-27 33214, 2012
hawke_1
I mean, PuTTY is a great Windows SSH client.
2012-11-27 33220, 2012
warp
hawke_1: a metro ssh client then.
2012-11-27 33236, 2012
hawke_1
Gotcha
2012-11-27 33245, 2012
ijabz_ joined the channel
2012-11-27 33256, 2012
warp
putty is solid and reliable, but has some annoying quirks.
2012-11-27 33202, 2012
hawke_1
Yes.
2012-11-27 33255, 2012
luks
a better question is, why do you use windows 8 if you are a free software zealot :P
2012-11-27 33204, 2012
warp
I just don't like windows (the user interface elements, not the os), and metro is just fullscreen all the time.
2012-11-27 33233, 2012
warp
luks: obviously I'm not very good at being a zealot :)
2012-11-27 33232, 2012
reosarevok
He just needs to know what to hate, clearly
2012-11-27 33242, 2012
reosarevok
But he seems quite bad at the hating it part
2012-11-27 33201, 2012
warp
I hate proprietary software. but not enough to stop using it.
2012-11-27 33219, 2012
reosarevok
Must be stressful :p
2012-11-27 33231, 2012
warp
I'm not a very hateful person
2012-11-27 33241, 2012
ianmcorvidae
I had that decision made for me, since I switched when I didn't have enough damn money to get anything proprietary legally anyway :P
2012-11-27 33203, 2012
warp
hm
2012-11-27 33206, 2012
nikki
I just hate windows too much to care about anything that needs windows :P
2012-11-27 33211, 2012
ianmcorvidae
and my pirated versions of Windows XP were getting less and less reliable with the working anyway, so :P
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
nikki
I had the unfortunate experience of setting up windows 7 a while back. I can't believe they still don't let you change the user interface language once you've finished setting it up. and I crashed it within a few minutes.
2012-11-27 33204, 2012
warp
nikki: I think you can change the interface language in windows 8.
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
nikki
took them long enough.
2012-11-27 33223, 2012
warp
certainly
2012-11-27 33247, 2012
warp
nikki: I'd try it, but I'm playing "the walking dead",.. and that game has so many issues with people losing savegames I don't dare quit the game until I've played through the whole thing.
2012-11-27 33206, 2012
reosarevok
heh
2012-11-27 33232, 2012
ijabz
Im still wondering if people would like all software to be free, and if it was I wonder what the end result would be
2012-11-27 33252, 2012
ijabz
(i have no answer to that question)
2012-11-27 33255, 2012
warp
ijabz: free as in beer or free as in freedom?
2012-11-27 33235, 2012
ijabz
I think free in beer follows from free as in freedom, but lets say free as in freedom
2012-11-27 33243, 2012
warp
I like to get paid for this job, so I definitely don't think free as in beer is a good idea. but I would like all software to be free (libre) software.
2012-11-27 33247, 2012
luks
all software will never be free
2012-11-27 33258, 2012
luks
all user applications might be
2012-11-27 33212, 2012
luks
but there will be still a lot of enterprise software that just can't be free
2012-11-27 33250, 2012
warp
I don't think either kind of free will ever happen to all software.
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
reosarevok
luks: isn't there a reasonable amount of free software with paid support that enterprise users pay for?
2012-11-27 33250, 2012
ijabz
warp, but musicbrainz software is free as in beer so I don't follow you
2012-11-27 33204, 2012
reosarevok
(of course, if you mean stuff like secret in-house stuff that gives a company an edge above competition, that's obviously not going to be open, but it isn't going to be sold to anyone else either...)
2012-11-27 33210, 2012
luks
reosarevok: no, I don't see a bank running on free software, ever
2012-11-27 33230, 2012
ijabz
or are you saying that even if all software that used mb was free as in freedom, that the writers of this sw would have funds to fund you
2012-11-27 33235, 2012
warp
ijabz: yes, we other sources of income, so that's fine. but I don't think all software should be gratis. writing software and selling it seems like a good profession, I don't want such jobs to dissapear.
2012-11-27 33204, 2012
luks
software that can be sold is only a fraction of software
2012-11-27 33223, 2012
reosarevok
luks: "Union Bank of California announced in January 2007 that it would standardize its IT infrastructure on Red Hat Enterprise Linux in order to lower costs." says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_adopte…
2012-11-27 33224, 2012
luks
companies still need software solution for many many things
2012-11-27 33234, 2012
reosarevok
Of course, I expect them to have propietary stuff on top of it anyway
2012-11-27 33211, 2012
luks
reosarevok: that's the operating system, not a banking system
2012-11-27 33223, 2012
ijabz
yeah, but going back to gp a company like lat.fm cannot legally run a observer and build anything on top of it without distributing that software source code
2012-11-27 33231, 2012
luks
that's where I make the distiontion, operating system is a software you can sell
2012-11-27 33241, 2012
luks
a custom-build banking system is something you can't sell
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
warp
ijabz: last.fm is not distributing much software, so the GPL has very little effect on them.
2012-11-27 33238, 2012
luks
plus the software that last.fm is distributing already is gpl
2012-11-27 33244, 2012
warp
ijabz: anything they do server-side is private
2012-11-27 33247, 2012
ijabz
So if they wanted to do that they have a problem, it doesn't matter whether or not they distribute such system
2012-11-27 33202, 2012
ijabz
i.e they run an mbserver, add a function that links it with another system, unless they distribute that fnc they are breaking the gpl aren't they,even though they have no wish to distribute said system
2012-11-27 33214, 2012
warp
ijabz: no, not at all.
2012-11-27 33228, 2012
ijabz
how come ?
2012-11-27 33234, 2012
warp
ijabz: the GPL never obligates you to distribute the software
2012-11-27 33254, 2012
luks
warp: distribution is not very clearly defined though
2012-11-27 33205, 2012
Prophet5 joined the channel
2012-11-27 33206, 2012
warp
ijabz: but IF you distribute software X, you have to (offer to) give the source along with it. but even then only to the person you're distributing to.
2012-11-27 33214, 2012
luks
some lawyers might argue that running the software is distribution, because it left the developer's machine
2012-11-27 33256, 2012
warp
luks: I don't understand what you mean with leaving the developer's machine.
2012-11-27 33238, 2012
luks
warp: that the developer distributed the software to some servers
2012-11-27 33207, 2012
ijabz
Ok , get it if you distribute it to someone, have to make source code available, but no requirement to distribute it publicly
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
luks
if you provide somebody with a copy, does it matter that it's a sysadmin in your company?
2012-11-27 33224, 2012
warp
luks: yes
2012-11-27 33203, 2012
luks
it's nowhere explicitly said
2012-11-27 33241, 2012
warp
luks: in general, distributing within a company isn't distributing or publishing. if you have independent contractors involved things get very complicated. but if it is only employees of the same company, that doesn't constitute distribution.
2012-11-27 33257, 2012
luks
warp: that's your opinion, but it's not defined in the license
2012-11-27 33217, 2012
warp
luks: no, this is just general copyright case law. this kind of stuff isn't spelled out in the licenses.
2012-11-27 33254, 2012
warp
the details will vary considerably depending on the country, etc..
2012-11-27 33259, 2012
luks
warp: it is, it's also precisely why gpl3 doesn't even call it distribution
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
warp
ijabz: yes, exactly.
2012-11-27 33221, 2012
MBJenkins
ianmcorvidae: MBS-5477: remove use of iso_code_for_display, conflicting tickets in last release
