Board index » kylix » Re: Our IDE?!

Re: Our IDE?!


2005-05-30 09:38:46 AM
kylix0
That looks pretty nice, I guess I would be all for it if it would be able to
do everything that the current Kylix IDE can do...webbroker and apache DSOs
Quote
For an IDE I could supply a base concept (if the IDE would be under
MPL1.1) andy.jgknet.de/misc/TBscreen.png This application allows me
to plug in multiple compilers (at the moment gcc166, avr-gcc and bcc32)
and a remote control program for a robots. And if I would remove or
replace the docking component it would compile unter Linux where the final
version should work, too.
There is no visual editor because for robots they are useless, but it
would be easily plug into this IDE.


 
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Edmund wrote:
Quote

Andreas Hausladen sighed and wrote::
>Edmund wrote:
>
>
>>As far as I know, and I hope I'm not misunderstanding you, what
>>you are attempting to do may not be permissible under the EULA.
>
>
>Can you show us the license passage that contains this restriction? I
>haven't found it (maybe I overlooked it) in the German Kylix 3 license.txt
>
>

Well, I'm entirely sure if this is the right phrase, but if 'writing my
own Kylix IDE' is considered a 'derivative work', then the following
clause applies:

5. LIMITATIONS. You may not: (a) modify, adapt, alter,
translate, or create derivative works of the Product or merge the
Product with other software other than as described in the Product's
accompanying documentation or as approved of in writing by Borland;

The question is whether or not it's the right interpretation
of the clause. Being not a lawyer, perhaps someone at TeamB
or Borland can enlighten us?

Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build another IDE.
Quote
Any clarifications appreciated.

Edmund
--
Jeff Overcash (TeamB)
(Please do not email me directly unless asked. Thank You)
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher
a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build
a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act
alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer,
cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for
insects. (RAH)
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Andreas Hausladen sighed and wrote::
Quote
Edmund wrote:


>As far as I know, and I hope I'm not misunderstanding you, what
>you are attempting to do may not be permissible under the EULA.


Can you show us the license passage that contains this restriction? I
haven't found it (maybe I overlooked it) in the German Kylix 3 license.txt


Well, I'm entirely sure if this is the right phrase, but if 'writing my
own Kylix IDE' is considered a 'derivative work', then the following
clause applies:
5. LIMITATIONS. You may not: (a) modify, adapt, alter,
translate, or create derivative works of the Product or merge the
Product with other software other than as described in the Product's
accompanying documentation or as approved of in writing by Borland;
The question is whether or not it's the right interpretation
of the clause. Being not a lawyer, perhaps someone at TeamB
or Borland can enlighten us?
Any clarifications appreciated.
Edmund
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Tony Caduto wrote:
Quote
That looks pretty nice, I guess I would be all for it if it would be able to
do everything that the current Kylix IDE can do...webbroker and apache DSOs
Do you know of any OS project that has these capabilities yet? I'd be
all over them if so...
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Jeff Overcash (TeamB) wrote:
Quote

Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build another IDE.

In my opinion, there is nothing in the K3 License what prohibits one
to make another IDE using this product.
" You may not: modify, adapt, alter, translate, or create derivative
works of the Product or merge the Product with other software other
than as described in the Product's accompanying documentation "
"other than" and the License and documentation says:
[..] " license to use the Product solely to create, compile (including
byte code compile), test and deploy, in source or object code form,
your own application programs and other works.."
[..] "Subject to the other terms and conditions of this License, you
may distribute your Works to others for production use."
[..] "Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, you may
freely redistribute source code or compiled code that is entirely your
own .."
[..]" Works that add primary and substantial functionality to the
Redistributables .." etc..
"..your own application programs and other works ",
it includes anything, and surely an IDE as long as the IDE is not
translation, modification, adaptation, alternation or derivative work
of Kylix.
"Derivative" legally means that the new code will contain a
substantial portion of the original software. The new IDE will not
contain Kylix code it will contain only "new works" and be used with
properly licensed Kylix only by the permitted Kylix user to achieve
interoperability of the failing product with current Linux technology.
It will not be necessary to redistribute any original parts of Kylix
or even to redistribute any permitted redistributables because the
end-user of the new IDE will have all the original files with the
original properly licensed Kylix.
Of course, I am not a lawyer, and very well a can be wrong.. but even
if it is the case, in my opinion it shouldn't be a problem because
any wording of the EULA is automatically suppressed by current law,
and if I remember correctly any of the imposed restriction in any EULA
may not limit your rights to achieve necessary interoperability with
other products or systems for example to make Kylix function again in
modern Linux environment. Furthermore, such project can be only
beneficial to Broland because users of this new IDE will have to
purchase Kylix in order to use it.
juliusz
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer
www.superobject.com/installmade/
www.superobject.com/imoe/download.html
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

How I have understood, it is impossible to develop the IDE not breaking the
license agreement?
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Quote
>
>5. LIMITATIONS. You may not: (a) modify, adapt, alter,
>translate, or create derivative works of the Product or merge the
>Product with other software other than as described in the Product's
>accompanying documentation or as approved of in writing by Borland;
>
>The question is whether or not it's the right interpretation
>of the clause. Being not a lawyer, perhaps someone at TeamB
>or Borland can enlighten us?
>


Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build another IDE.


My english is not very good.
Can somebody explain how I am either
modifying or adapting or altering or translating or creating derivative
works by writing basically a GUI-editor with an interface to either dcc
or fpc and gdb?
Thanks!
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Jeff Overcash (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
>Well, I'm entirely sure if this is the right phrase, but if
>'writing my own Kylix IDE' is considered a 'derivative work', then
>the following clause applies:
>
>5. LIMITATIONS. You may not: (a) modify, adapt, alter,
>translate, or create derivative works of the Product or merge the
>Product with other software other than as described in the
>Product's accompanying documentation or as approved of in
>writing by Borland;
>
>The question is whether or not it's the right interpretation
>of the clause. Being not a lawyer, perhaps someone at TeamB
>or Borland can enlighten us?
Right. Assuming this is the clause that stops it, lets write it
out to see if it really applies. It says this:
"You may not:
(a)
-- modify,
-- adapt,
-- alter,
-- translate,
-- or create
derivative works of the Product
or
[b] merge the Product with other software
-- other than as described in the Product's accompanying
documentation
or
-- as approved of in writing by Borland;"
Now, how do you guys arrive at 'No IDE can be created with Kylix'
with these limitations.
a) You are not, modifying, adapting, altering, translating Kylix,
and you are not creating a derivative of Kylix in any sense of the
words. What you are doing is creating an application (which is
what Kylix is meant for) that happens to be an IDE. Why is this
any different from any application?
b) Are you in any way merging Kylix with your own applications?
How is an application (that happens to be an IDE) different from
an ordinary application?
I too would like to know TeamB's and/or Borland's careful
interpretations --'careful' in the sense that tey should not
point in the direction of incriminating their current
Delphi/Kylix users..
I'd like it to be a little more specific than a blank sentence
like 'yes, it is the one'... I'd like to know how so, and how
is it different from, say, Dev-Pascal which was written in Delphi
www.{*word*76}shed.net/devpascal.html
and has been around for ages.
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Hi Siegfried
Quote

>I'm currently thinking about writing my onwn Kylix IDE.

..


Hi Theo,

Sounds interesting.. Now that B is on the .Net IDE train it makes more
snse too. i.e. Delphi IDE code is thurther removed from producing a
Kylix successor on the same code base.

Some initial Suggestions.

Since this will be a big project..

Some Steps to think about:

1. Detailed Project plan and specification document with breakdown
sections on at least the minimum functionality - initialy people can
send their requirements and ideas to a central person. for e.g. An open
Plug-in infrastructure for IDE modules
also framework newtral i.e. allowing for LCL or CLX components etc..
2. Source Code standards specification
3. Project leader - core development team selection
4. Bug tracking system
5. Project Hosting - sourceforge?

Slowly... ;-)
When I say I'm THINKING about writing my OWN IDE, That does not
necessarily imply that:
a: I'll actually DO it
b: I'd like to do it in a team or be a "project leader"
But I hold no patent on this idea: ;-)
If somebody would like to coordinate all that and open a sourceforge
project, that would be great. I'll certainly be one of those who help.
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Well, if this turns out to be true, there is no reason Lazarus could not
be used to build a IDE.
Or why not modify Lazarus to use the Kylix compiler?
Quote
Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build another IDE.
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

theo sighed and wrote::
Quote

>>
>>5. LIMITATIONS. You may not: (a) modify, adapt, alter,
>>translate, or create derivative works of the Product or merge the
>>Product with other software other than as described in the Product's
>>accompanying documentation or as approved of in writing by Borland;
>>
>>The question is whether or not it's the right interpretation
>>of the clause. Being not a lawyer, perhaps someone at TeamB
>>or Borland can enlighten us?
>>
>
>
>Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build
>another IDE.
>
>

My english is not very good.
Can somebody explain how I am either
modifying or adapting or altering or translating or creating derivative
works by writing basically a GUI-editor with an interface to either dcc
or fpc and gdb?
GUI-editor, as in a visual Component editor? If you're creating
a "GUI-Editor" with an interface to dcc (AFAIK, this should be
considered 'adapting' : in the sense, you are adapting dcc to
your own work and thusly creating a similar application to what
Kylix is..).
I think the issue of the matter is whether or not your final
application is considered something that can be used in
'conjunction' with Kylix, or is a substitute to Kylix.
If it is a substitute, then you are basically creating
a derivative work using Kylix. That, I believe is what
is considered the 'non-competitive clause' in that you
cannot use Kylix (in any way) to create a product that
'replaces'/substitutes Kylix. That's what I read
from the Licensing Agreement. (EULA are pretty nice
reads if you are bored {*word*99}less. :))
Edmund
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Edmund wrote:
Quote
GUI-editor, as in a visual Component editor? If you're creating
a "GUI-Editor" with an interface to dcc (AFAIK, this should be
considered 'adapting' : in the sense, you are adapting dcc to
your own work and thusly creating a similar application to what
Kylix is..).
Yes, an adaptation takes place. However, there is very subtle but
important difference. The GUI-editor is adapted to Kylix not the other
way around, because the dcc compiler is not distributed, sold , etc..
with the GUI creator as a separate product in attempt to circumvent
the Kylix license.
A properly licensed Kylix user has the right to make the Kylix
functional, as intended and has the right to invoke the Kylix compiler
(dcc) outside of the Kylix IDE if necessary, for example from a shell
console, an application link with parameters, a shell script or from
an application by using fork, exec, popup, or system with parameters
to any pascal file and it is entirely irrelevant by what means the
pascal files was created. Any such external tools like a
Kylix-specific text editor, Kylix-specific GUI Designer, an IDE etc..
are perfectly acceptable because they are complementing and enhancing
Kylix and aiding the development process with Kylix.
Quote

I think the issue of the matter is whether or not your final
application is considered something that can be used in
'conjunction' with Kylix, or is a substitute to Kylix.
Correct,
juliusz
Quote
If it is a substitute, then you are basically creating
a derivative work using Kylix. That, I believe is what
is considered the 'non-competitive clause' in that you
cannot use Kylix (in any way) to create a product that
'replaces'/substitutes Kylix. That's what I read
from the Licensing Agreement. (EULA are pretty nice
reads if you are bored {*word*99}less. :))

Edmund

 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Also what is necessary to make to receive the sanction? Who can be can
prompt? I think Borland have closed project Kylix and further it will not
develop. Who be can prompt?
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

juliusz sighed and wrote::
Quote
Jeff Overcash (TeamB) wrote:

>
>Yes this is the section that prevents you from using Kylix to build
>another IDE.
>

In my opinion, there is nothing in the K3 License what prohibits one to
make another IDE using this product.

" You may not: modify, adapt, alter, translate, or create derivative
works of the Product or merge the Product with other software other than
as described in the Product's accompanying documentation "
One thing I missed is that you CAN do that provided it is approved
by Borland. So the OP may still get the chance at creating his
work provided he checks with Borland.
Quote


"other than" and the License and documentation says:

[..] " license to use the Product solely to create, compile (including
byte code compile), test and deploy, in source or object code form, your
own application programs and other works.."

[..] "Subject to the other terms and conditions of this License, you may
distribute your Works to others for production use."

[..] "Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, you may
freely redistribute source code or compiled code that is entirely your
own .."

[..]" Works that add primary and substantial functionality to the
Redistributables .." etc..

You're not reading the EULA correctly. Redistributables do not
refer to the final app that you create, but the libraries (ie.
in the case of Delphi, BDE redistributable..).
Also, the ordering of your quotes are very significant. You
are quoting Section 2, which lists the 'general' licensing
agreement terms; BUT, section 5 which is what you quoted
first is a specific clause/section that states what
you are not permitted to do despite section 2.
Quote
"..your own application programs and other works ",
it includes anything, and surely an IDE as long as the IDE is not
translation, modification, adaptation, alternation or derivative work of
Kylix.

"Derivative" legally means that the new code will contain a substantial
portion of the original software. The new IDE will not contain Kylix
code it will contain only "new works" and be used with properly
licensed Kylix only by the permitted Kylix user to achieve
interoperability of the failing product with current Linux technology.
No. Derivative does not specify the containment of original(or
otherwise) code. Derviative, in this useage, infers 'function',
and not about code.
Quote
It will not be necessary to redistribute any original parts of Kylix or
even to redistribute any permitted redistributables because the
end-user of the new IDE will have all the original files with the
original properly licensed Kylix.
I hope I'm understanding this correctly. You mean to tell me that
the OP's new IDE will be distributed to those who has to have
a valid/legal Kylix installation?
Quote


Of course, I am not a lawyer, and very well a can be wrong.. but even
if it is the case, in my opinion it shouldn't be a problem because any
wording of the EULA is automatically suppressed by current law, and if I
I'm not sure what you mean by 'automatically suppressed'.
Quote
remember correctly any of the imposed restriction in any EULA may not
limit your rights to achieve necessary interoperability with other
products or systems for example to make Kylix function again in modern
Linux environment. Furthermore, such project can be only beneficial to
But the intention of the OP wasn't to make Kylix function again, but
to create a 'new Kylix IDE'. Thusly, this is directly against the
'non competitive' clause as stated in Section/Clause 5. Whether or not
the underlying libraries (component libraries, etc...) are
used is a moot point.
Quote
Broland because users of this new IDE will have to purchase Kylix in
order to use it.
Perhaps a Borlander or a TeamB member might want to jump in and
clarify this. AFAIK, the LA disapproves of what the OP's original
intention was unless given a written approval from Borland. Unless,
of course, I am mistaken and I misunderstood the OP's intent.
Edmund
 

Re:Re: Our IDE?!

Edmund wrote:
Quote
No. Derivative does not specify the containment of original(or
otherwise) code. Derviative, in this useage, infers 'function',
and not about code.

You probably interpreting the ward "derivative" in the common meaning
of the word. Normally, if the word "derivative" is used in context of
software it strictly relates to the quantity and importance of the
code witch was incorporated or based on in creation of the new
product. If the original content exits the established threshold then
the final product can be called derivative. A simple functional
similarity of a software is not sufficient to declare it as a derivative.
Quote

>It will not be necessary to redistribute any original parts of Kylix or
>even to redistribute any permitted redistributables because the
>end-user of the new IDE will have all the original files with the
>original properly licensed Kylix.

I hope I'm understanding this correctly. You mean to tell me that
the OP's new IDE will be distributed to those who has to have
a valid/legal Kylix installation?

I cannot speak for others, I do not know what intentions they have,
but if the proposed IDE will utilize the Kylix compiler then it can be
used only with a properly licensed Kylix.
Quote

I'm not sure what you mean by 'automatically suppressed'.

A software EULA can't preempt law. For example in situation when it
is necessary to achieve interoperability with other systems and it is
not possible or impractical to achieve such interoperability by normal
means then there is a law which permits one to do revers-engineering
to achieve such interoperability, even if the EULA specifically
prohibits it.
Quote

>Broland because users of this new IDE will have to purchase Kylix in
>order to use it.


Perhaps a Borlander or a TeamB member might want to jump in and
clarify this. AFAIK, the LA disapproves of what the OP's original
intention was unless given a written approval from Borland. Unless,
of course, I am mistaken and I misunderstood the OP's intent.

Yes, it would be nice if someone officially authorised by Borland
could explain if it is permitted to create a tool which will aid and
complement the development process with Kylix.. I think it is very
important issue..
juliusz