<gkarekinian>
I can't answer the second question though :)
number735 has joined #nanoc
<gkarekinian>
Ruby projects tend to use MIT/BSD licences, because they're not restrictive
<musicmatze>
Okay... Because I'm thinking about putting my latest project under GPL. But don't know what drawbacks come with this.
gour has joined #nanoc
number7351 has joined #nanoc
number735 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
rolfb has joined #nanoc
yogsototh has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
yogsototh has joined #nanoc
cDlm has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
number7351 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<gour>
what do you think about nanoc vs docpad? the latter looks cool, but mayb the latter is not really what we're looking for?
cDlm has joined #nanoc
tbm has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
tbm has joined #nanoc
<smkelly>
ddfreyne: I am now in Texas, USA.
<musicmatze>
ddfreyne: Can you tell me some good tutorials on graph theory? I'm thinking about how to resolve dependencies between items! Need to find circles and build a tree out of a (eventually) graph. And: With the Rule-File you can build up the dependencies between items/files, right?
<musicmatze>
ddfreyne: And I need an idea how to save compiling states.
<musicmatze>
:-P Maybe I can take some ideas from nanoc and jekyll...
jugglinmike has joined #nanoc
<Skyr>
musicmatze: I read a blog article discussing the licensing issue
<Skyr>
musicmatze: Unfortunately, I can't find it anymore :(
<Skyr>
musicmatze: Bottom line was: If you're a large(r) company which has a large enough advantage of knowledge in case some competitor uses your software, go BSD or similar
<Skyr>
musicmatze: If you're a small company (or freelancer), stick to GPL, AGPL or similar.
<Skyr>
So you're not risking that a competitor gains advantage of your code without contributing back.
<musicmatze>
Skyr: Thanks. I read something about AGPL sucks... don't know why....
<musicmatze>
That's a good point.
<Skyr>
I'm afraid you'll have to check that for yourself :)
<musicmatze>
:)
<Skyr>
If you simply don't care who uses your software (i.e. it is not the focus of your main business), you can stick to a BSDish license. But then you're up to the good will that someone contributes back.
<musicmatze>
That's not what I want... I think GPL is the best idea, or LGPL
<Skyr>
On the other hand, many companies avoid GPLled programs because it's a constant hassle. You always have to be extra-careful not to "infect" your company's code.
<Skyr>
So if you put a program under the GPL, chances are high that no company will join the effort.
<musicmatze>
therefor LGPL exists, right?
<Skyr>
Then, on the other hand, this is all theory. In pracice, this would require someone to take notice of your project first :-) And if you think a GPL violation is happening, you'll have to enforce it at court (which can be really expensive)
<Skyr>
L stands for Library. It separates a library from the rest of the program. The library itself is treated as a GPL program, but linking to it won't infect the linking program.
<musicmatze>
Okay, thanks. I will keep that in mind. But now it's time for some food!
<Skyr>
The AGPL does afaik something similar.
<musicmatze>
L stands for "Lesser"
<Skyr>
Or "Linker exception"
<musicmatze>
but okay, same think.
<Skyr>
Choose one
<musicmatze>
thing*
<musicmatze>
hihi
<musicmatze>
okay... but now I choose lunch.
<musicmatze>
cu
<Skyr>
AGPL tries the same thing LGPL does for libraries - for web services
<Skyr>
It prohibits to expose a modified program via the web (or similar) without publishing your modifications
<Skyr>
musicmatze: So if you are writing a site generator, the AGPL would force a company to publish their modifications to your generator if they'd offer a web service to publish websites using your software behind the scenes.
<ddfreyne>
gour: Regarding the Hacker News article, there is truth in there. The good news is that three years of experience with nanoc 3.x have given me a good view of what I want with nanoc 4.x, which is a work in progress. The two weak points are well known and are being tackled in nanoc 4.0
<ddfreyne>
nanoc 4.0 will be backwards incompatible with nanoc 3.x, but the upgrade process should be easy
<ddfreyne>
musicmatze: I really dislike GPL and AGPL
<ddfreyne>
guardian: I haven't gotten around to reproducing it
<ddfreyne>
gour: How big is the site you want to build? (in number of pages)
<musicmatze>
ddfreyne: Thanks! Why do you dislike these licenses?
<ddfreyne>
gour: Unless your site has several thousand pages, nanoc will be fine
<gour>
ddfreyne: <1000 for now, no odea about the future...any eta for 4.x?
<musicmatze>
... for everything else, there will be thessc *smile*
* gour
--> afk. bbl
<ddfreyne>
musicmatze: I believe in freedom and that means I don't want to restrict usage on how people use my software too much. I can't use GPLed software in combination with a MIT-licensed project, for instance.
<ddfreyne>
musicmatze: LGPL ensures that modifications to the software are released, but LGPLed software can still be used with non-GPL or even non-open-source software
<ddfreyne>
Which is perfectly fine; the world isn't all open source and it never will be. Some stuff is quite okay to be closed-source
<ddfreyne>
Actually, strictly speaking, nanoc is probably violating a couple of licenses because there are filters for GPLed projects... and therefore nanoc should not interact with them.
<darix>
how can mit violate GPL?
<darix>
you dont impose any additional restrictions
<musicmatze>
okay, so your advice would be LGPL, if I understand you correctly?
<ddfreyne>
musicmatze: LGPL if you want modifications to your software to be shared, MIT if you don't really care
<ddfreyne>
darix: I cannot link to GPLed software in my MIT project
<musicmatze>
okay, sounds nice for me.
<darix>
ddfreyne: sure you can
<musicmatze>
I will read your conversation later, have to go now! Thanks for your advice, ddfreyn!
<darix>
ddfreyne: i think you only run into problems with licenses that add more restrictions on top of what GPL does
<darix>
like bsd4c
<ddfreyne>
or gplv2 vs gplv3 ;)
<stbuehler>
the FSF certainly does not want you to link your MIT project against GPL libraries
<darix>
ddfreyne: that they made their own licenses incompatible
<darix>
*shrug*
<stbuehler>
calling GPL free is a joke anyway :)
<guardian>
I use WTFPL2
<smkelly>
I also like the BSD license
cDlm has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
number735 has joined #nanoc
cDlm has joined #nanoc
<musicmatze>
Stupid people in the rooming house -.-' If one dns server is in the local network, noone has an internet connaction anymore -.-
<musicmatze>
Going to note all important ips now...
<gkarekinian>
Why don't you use an external DNS server?
number7351 has joined #nanoc
number735 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
number7351 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<gour>
ddfreyne afaict, there is not such big diference between e.g. RoR and Django, but wonder why are Ruby-based static generators so much better than he Python ones?
<cDlm>
python does not have a culture of making things simple
<cDlm>
or maybe both simple and terse
<cDlm>
(I might be speaking bullsh*t here)
<gour>
:-)
<gour>
i wonder if there is even single ssg which even remotely resembles nanoc?
<cDlm>
have you had a look at middleman ?
<cDlm>
their website seems pretty clean and I must say I liked what I saw
<cDlm>
but the devil is in the details :)
<gour>
cDlm: i consider(ed) middleman, but was thinking about ssg-s on the python side :-)
<cDlm>
does python have something like bundler ?
<gour>
i'm not quite familiar with ruby stuff. what's bundler?
<gour>
it seems it does not...there is pypi, but package management in python, afaik, sucks
<cDlm>
it expresses and maintains the dependencies of your project
<cDlm>
yeah that was my impression
<cDlm>
there's more than one way to install stuff, which is a bit… ironic
<gour>
people use virtualenv and pip to create isolated envs
<cDlm>
that's like rbenv or rvm gemsets
<gour>
recently setuptools and distribute project merged back :-)
<cDlm>
bundler just ensures all the gems necessary for your project are installed and available
<cDlm>
on a per-project basis, but without making completely separate ruby installations
<gour>
interesting...being able to keep different versions of gems system-wide?
<cDlm>
gem does that already
<cDlm>
bundler is just selecting which ones your project is seeing
<gour>
cool. virtualenv exists because it's pain to have different version of the same package system-wide