| |
Main
Date: 09 Nov 2007 21:43:00
From: Guy Macon
Subject: FAKE Scid released (chess database software)
|
Dave wrote:
>Has anyone thought why the GNU C compiler is called gcc? I guess it was
>to allow the original C compilers on UNIX systems (all called cc) to
>coexist happily with the GNU compiler. Same with the vim, the editor
>based on vi.
Originally GCC stood for GNU C Compiler, but later was exapanced to
stand for Gnu Compiler Collection as it was extended to compile code
written in Fortran, ADA, Java, Objective-C, etc.
The authors of GCC and VIM, not being thiefs, did not steal the name
of the existing CC and VI programs without the author's permission.
Pascal wrote:
>
>Andreas Schwarz a ?crit:
>
>> Ok, but if you use the same name, it's not possible to include your
>> version into the package management systems (for example, the freebsd
>> ports structure). Your version collide with the original Scid, this
>> causes some problems.
>
>That is right. Maybe renaming to Scid2 would ease things ?
You already had a different name: Scid-pg. Then you decided to
pretend that your program was Scid and steal the Scid name.
Of *course* renaming it to some non-stolen name would ease things!
Picking a *third* name for your program is a bad idea. Call it
Scid-pg.
>Anyway is there any interest in having anywhere the two versions at the
>same time ? I do because I need to make some regression tests, but I
>doubt any user would need both.
That's not for you to decide. You shouldn't assume that nobody else
wants to have the real Scid and your fake Scid on the same PC.
The real Scid already exists and is already in various name-based
databases, package management systems, the sourceforge page, etc.
Nobody is going to delete the real Scid to make room for your
impostor. Your decision to steal the Scid name kept you from having
your program on sourceforge, and now it appears that your decision to
steal the Scid name is keeping your program out of the freebsd ports
structure. You are only shooting yourself in the foot by stealing
the Scid name. Change it back to Scid-pg. Don't pick yet a third
name; that will just confuse things further.
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.guymacon.com/ >
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 23:20:16
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: FAKE Scid released (chess database software)
|
Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/ > wrote:
>
>>Anyway is there any interest in having anywhere the two versions at the
>>same time ? I do because I need to make some regression tests, but I
>>doubt any user would need both.
>
> That's not for you to decide. You shouldn't assume that nobody else
> wants to have the real Scid and your fake Scid on the same PC.
>
Yes, in fact, if a user has SCID installed currently, and then finds Scid-pg
and decides to try it out, he or she should not have to worry about Scid-pg
clobbering the Scid install. It is a pompous approach to think that Scid-pg
IS Scid, when in fact, it is simply a BRANCH. It can only become SCID and
head in the source tree if Shane explicitly gives Pascal the right to do this
[or imports Pascal's branch into his own as head].
> The real Scid already exists and is already in various name-based
> databases, package management systems, the sourceforge page, etc.
> Nobody is going to delete the real Scid to make room for your
> impostor. Your decision to steal the Scid name kept you from having
> your program on sourceforge, and now it appears that your decision to
> steal the Scid name is keeping your program out of the freebsd ports
> structure. You are only shooting yourself in the foot by stealing
> the Scid name. Change it back to Scid-pg. Don't pick yet a third
> name; that will just confuse things further.
>
I won't use it, because I don't like what I have seen happen here. I did try
ChessDB once out of curiosity about its ability to update the games database,
but I have not given any real usage to anything but the original Scid in
several years [don't get me wrong, Scid is a wonderful piece of software ... I
just tend to use the database tools in the Fritz UI].
Honestly, I would consider writing the whole thing in .NET or Java (for me ...
the former as that is my profession); perhaps referencing the original code
from Shane and keeping the new application licensed under the GPL. And of
course, nobody should go ape shit about .NET as it is plenty portable to many
platforms thanks to projects like Mono; at least for an application like this.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
When the ax entered the forest, the trees said, "The handle is one of us!"
-- Turkish proverb
|
| | |
Date: 10 Nov 2007 09:16:45
From: Pascal
Subject: Re: FAKE Scid released (chess database software)
|
Thomas T. Veldhouse a �crit :
> Yes, in fact, if a user has SCID installed currently, and then finds Scid-pg
> and decides to try it out, he or she should not have to worry about Scid-pg
> clobbering the Scid install.
That is false. On Linux, you can install it without any problem from
sources, leaving Scid 3.6.1 on your system. I don't force anybody to use
any particular software. Some are pleased to find what I do, and I
wonder if there are any reason (regression, broken updates, etc.) to
stick with a software that has not been updated for years, and will not
be, unfortunately, for a long time or probably forever. But users have
the choice. You have the choice. Simply I don't like the idea of Scid's
about box displaying "2004". And I have the right to change that.
On Windows you can even install my own version of Scid on an USB key,
even without the usual windows setup process (a simple binary to unzip).
> It is a pompous approach to think that Scid-pg
> IS Scid, when in fact, it is simply a BRANCH.
Ok, that's a branch. Sorry BRANCH.
> It can only become SCID and
> head in the source tree if Shane explicitly gives Pascal the right to do this
> [or imports Pascal's branch into his own as head].
Scid has been abandonned since 2004. Did you notice that ? Nobody takes
care of Scid and all the related stuff around it at SF. Did you notice
that ?
But let me be clear : I like what I do, some users also, and feel free
not to use my pompous approach !
Pascal
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Nov 2007 06:11:27
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: FAKE Scid released (chess database software)
|
Pascal <[email protected] > wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse a ?crit :
>
>> Yes, in fact, if a user has SCID installed currently, and then finds Scid-pg
>> and decides to try it out, he or she should not have to worry about Scid-pg
>> clobbering the Scid install.
>
> That is false. On Linux, you can install it without any problem from
> sources, leaving Scid 3.6.1 on your system. I don't force anybody to use
> any particular software. Some are pleased to find what I do, and I
> wonder if there are any reason (regression, broken updates, etc.) to
> stick with a software that has not been updated for years, and will not
> be, unfortunately, for a long time or probably forever. But users have
> the choice. You have the choice. Simply I don't like the idea of Scid's
> about box displaying "2004". And I have the right to change that.
>
Yes, you do, but irreverantly taking over the name Scid as if it is your work
is arrogant and simply wrong. Still, you clearly would prefer to put your
self on a pedastal and ignore the valid complaints that others have raised
here about you claiming succession to Shane's work. Should the day come back
and he continue with his work .. I will get no end of joy watching you squirm
you way out of that.
> On Windows you can even install my own version of Scid on an USB key,
> even without the usual windows setup process (a simple binary to unzip).
>
>> It is a pompous approach to think that Scid-pg
>> IS Scid, when in fact, it is simply a BRANCH.
>
> Ok, that's a branch. Sorry BRANCH.
>
>> It can only become SCID and
>> head in the source tree if Shane explicitly gives Pascal the right to do this
>> [or imports Pascal's branch into his own as head].
>
> Scid has been abandonned since 2004. Did you notice that ? Nobody takes
> care of Scid and all the related stuff around it at SF. Did you notice
> that ?
Scid is Shane's work. You seem prone to rationalization, but clearly revel in
the perceived glory you think you will get by adding features to his work and
calling it your own ... in fact, the vast majority is still Shane's work [and
some others] and you are nothing more than an ursurper who may be called on it
someday by Shane himself.
>
> But let me be clear : I like what I do, some users also, and feel free
> not to use my pompous approach !
>
NOBODY is asking you to stop working on new enhancements to the SCID project.
But let's be clear here, you are working on a branch, and a branch is not
SCID, it is a branch of SCID. More precisely, since the the original
repository has not been branched, you are really working on a FORK. Consider
the original BSD implementation ... no one came along claiming to be BSD ...
and instead of you have FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc.
Consider being polite and ethical and do the right thing and name your fork
for what it is. You bring dishonor on yourself. I hope Shane recovers from
whatever has kept him away for the last couple of years and if he comes back,
he has the right to use the name SCID and you do not.
I will use either SCID or ChessDB for this reason alone. Frankly, I am
getting tempted to write a new version to get rid of all the TCL crap.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
When the ax entered the forest, the trees said, "The handle is one of us!"
-- Turkish proverb
|
|
