"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:495### [at] hotmailcom...
>>
>> The redistribution of the beta source code is prohibited. There won't be 
>> a permission for anyone to distribute the beta source code or binary in 
>> any other form. The purpose of making the beta source code available is 
>> to get submissions of bug fixes that will be added to the official beta 
>> source code and beta binaries - assuming they work, of course ;-)
>>
>
> I think a relevant question here is: what is a distribution of source. If 
> clipka sends the source or a binary by regular mail to e.g. Thomas is that 
> distribution? or must it be publicly available to be one. If it is the 
> first then collaboration to implement and test improvements of beta source 
> is effectively impossible. I can think of reasons to do it that way. One 
> would be that source in this beta (double beta?) stage should be 
> coordinated by a POV team member. But, which one should that be? In this 
> specific case of radiosity: who is coordinating that and would that person 
> in this case give permission to create a test version for a selected group 
> to use?
>
> Another one: if clipka had started from the 3.16 source would that have 
> made a difference?


Right. The Real World is tougher than I imagined (and rightly so, I suppose) 
:-)

We need a creative solution to solve this conundrum, because it would be too 
absurde if, for legal reasons, improvement testing of beta elements could 
not procede one way or another. I suppose that the best way to go would be 
to implement Clipka's work in some beta, have it tested and reported back by 
the community. Following which, decisions can be made about further 
implementation or trashing.

My world view is simple, I know, but we have to start somewhere.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message