RE: Topologica port to Linux (was: A call to action)

[Doug Loss <dloss@csrlink.net>]

On Tue, 3 Aug 1999 00:25:55 +0100, "Marshal Anderson" <marshal@marshal.co.uk> wrote:
>
> OK - I think you have come up with about 100 different reasons not to do it.
> That's just fine. You seem to have decided exactly what Topo's approach
> would be to such a project. My motivation was to see if there was anyone
> within, or outside this group, who would be interested in beginning
> discussion.

I suspect you misunderstand Ray's questions. It sounded to me like he was 
trying to begin the discussion you're talking about bu asking for more 
information on what sort of collaboration you're proposing.

> What Topo is offering is marketing (or giving-away) access to
> some 30,000 UK schools as well as many in Canada, Australia and NewZealand.
> We (i.e. The Collective) would be keen to promote alternatives to Some
> Current Operating Systems. To this end we /might/ be prepared to allow the
> conversion of some of our (award winning) designs - a project in which we
> would expect to /share/ the risk with the programmer.

I would have to agree with Ray; more details are needed before anyone would 
take that offer.

> I you don't feel that
> Linux has the commercial potential to carry edsoft then I would question the
> purpose of this listserve, if you do then I would suggest that starting with
> a few proven products would be a good way of launching it.
>
I agree that porting programs with a proven track record would increase the 
likelihood of success.  All that Ray was asking about (correct me when I 
inevitably err, Ray) was the terms of the collaboration--licensing, 
distribution, ownership, financial terms if the program is to be commercial, 
etc.

> They might see a package that grabbed their imagination, that they felt was
> of value, that they felt they had some of the programming skills and could
> get the rest to produce it for the Linux OS. At that point Topo would decide
> if it felt confident with that person (people) and would start to talk about
> open/closed standards, methods of distribution, commercial considerations,
> permissions (topo /never/ takes the copyright of an outside
> writer's/designer's work unless the designer wishes to sell it - they
> certainly own none of mine) etc.
>
So the take is to find an interesting program and then discuss the terms of 
the port?  That's fine.  One question, though.  Since Topo never acquires the 
copyright of a program, would the porter to Linux hold any copyright to his or 
her work?  And if so, could the porter choose to release the port under a GPL 
license?  That's likely where the major discussion will go on once both sides 
are confident in the feasibility and presumed quality of the proposed port.

I doubt that any of these questions are unanswerable, but they would need to 
be agreed upon before any substantial work was done, I'd think.

Doug Loss            Always acknowledge a fault.  This will throw
dloss@csrlink.net    those in authority off their guard and give
(570) 326-3987       you the opportunity to commit more.
                        Mark Twain