Subject: [linux-audio-dev] [Fwd: Re: ReBorn]
From: Davy Durham (ddurham_AT_netdoor.com)
Date: Thu Aug 15 2002 - 17:19:16 EEST
I forwarded that email about copyrighted interfaces to the author.. and
here's what he said:
attached mail follows:
Hi Davy
I've been trying to sign up for the LAD list, but I can't seem to be able to!
Please would you forward this response to the list on my behalf.....
Regards
Doc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all
I've been trying to sign up for this list for a few days and I never seem
to get notification that my subscription has worked, so I've asked Davy
Durham to forward this email on my behalf...
I'm very dissapointed with what I've seen on the LAD list. The level of
ignorance and conjecture in some postings almost rivals that on the
Propellerheads General Discussion board, where they've also been talking
about ReBorn and I've been labelled a "criminal".
One post in particular has annoyed me significantly enough to provoke a
reply:
> I'm guessing that Mr. Singer realized too late that using Gsynth code in
> Reborn would make it so he would have to open up the rest of the code,
> which he wanted to sell.
Then your guess is very, VERY wide of the mark. Did you bother to *read*
any of the documentation I provided? I made it perfectly clear that ReBorn
*would* become open source. I'm afraid I don't believe in the "release early,
release often" philosophy, and that's that. I wanted to get ReBorn out in the
open to get some feedback on it while I cleaned up the code (the main part
of which was an ugly hack) for release. I'm not interested in whether you
think I should have released it immediately, it was my decision and in this
wonderful world of freedom that we all bleat on about, it was my choice.
> But he doesn't get it. Why else would he put "DO NOT SELL" stickers all
> over it's legal bits? So instead
No, I'm afraid it's *you* who don't get it. The "do not sell" condition is
because the author of the code on which the PNG loading routines
was based allowed me to use his work in a binary release on the
condition that I don't *sell* reborn. Simple as that.
> the law, he's trying to back out of it all by claiming that lawyers are
> biting him. This will give him enough time to remove the Gsynth code and
> close the rest of the source.
You should write for films. That's quite an imagination. :-)
> He pretty much admits this if you read between the lines of what he
> wrote on his web page.
How about if you actually *read* the lines. Then you'll get the *actual*
information...
> The old FAQ for Reborn was quite flippant about the whole open source
> thing as well.
Yes, it was. And I'll tell you why. I love Linux, I love the whole Open
Source ideal. I'm something of a Linux evangelist in my social circle.
What I *hate*, however, is this whole anally retentive obsession with the
Open Source licence, as we've seen here. Just because I had the *nerve*
to release a first-draft of my program in binary-only, I am now persecuted as
some sort of anti-freedom activist.
This is supposed to be a list for "audio developers", instead all that's
getting discussed (surprise, surprise) is the damn license issue. This whole
experience has left a seriously sour taste in my mouth regarding the Open
Source issue and in a way I'm glad ReBorn has gone. I'm certainly
having second thoughts as to whether I ever *want* to be a part of the
ignorance, petulance and arrogance that exists in *some* corners of the
Open Source community and epitomized by your posting.
> I'd be very interested to see what kind of email he got (if it actually
> exists) to make him drop the project like this.
I am not prepared to reproduce an email from someone without their
permission. So *that* should fuel your conspiracy theory, heh!?
Why would I *need* an excuse to drop the project if I wanted to?
> It so gets under my skin. If I was a Gsynth author, I'd be furious out
> of my mind right now.
You're certainly out of your mind. Doesn't the phrase "Used with permission"
mean *anything* to you? I used a dozen lines (bascially just the 303 filter)
from Gsynth, and I contaced the Author (Andy Sloane) to ask his permission.
I made it *perfectly* clear to him that the initial release would probably be
closed source. Andy was more than happy to allow me to use the code.
> I do take comfort in the fact that Reborn was awful.
As compared with *your* soft synth offering, which is called..... Oh hang
on now, don't tell me.... Damn! What is it?
> And any moron with
> one remaining ear could do a better 303 emulation given the Gsynth code.
Well, from what I've read so far I'd say you were at least half qualified.
Write one and send it in to the list....
-- David J. Singer doc_AT_deadvirgins.org.uk "Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 17:17:32 EEST