06:33 <Regenaxer> Hmm, libedit's API is different

07:17 <Regenaxer> Grr, it doesn't even use .inputrc

07:17 <Regenaxer> I *hate* this license mess

07:25 <Regenaxer> The main reason for me to use readline() was to stay COMPATIBLE with the rest of the world

07:25 <Regenaxer> ONE config

07:25 <Regenaxer> I could have stayed with my self-rolled line editor @lib/led.l as well then :(

07:30 <Regenaxer> Or go back to GPL?

08:22 <wineroots> You may get good publicity with GPL. But, GPL will mean legally being bound to publish(any pil21 modifiers) modifications if someone chooses to do so. Choose your pick. Does it matter in the long end of things? Would GPL create any relevant issues later?

08:26 <Regenaxer> Not for me

08:26 <Regenaxer> Several people complained, so I switched to MIT

08:26 <Regenaxer> aw was one of them iirc

08:26 <Regenaxer> also some guys in India

08:27 <Regenaxer> I personally don't care

08:27 <Regenaxer> What if I release completely *without* any licence? Everybody

08:27 <Regenaxer> can pick what she likes

08:29 <Regenaxer> indeed

08:30 <Regenaxer> Why not distribute the sources without? It is just text

08:30 <Regenaxer> I'm fed up

08:30 <wineroots> GNUreadline will make it hard. GNU demands enforcement of copyright or the 4 freedoms as defined. Readline could make it an issue(if someone discovers) sometime in the future

08:31 <Regenaxer> yes, that's how I understood it

08:34 <wineroots> Maybe post in the mailing list for wider opinion. Things could've changed or it's not an issue any longer, or perhaps it still is an issue to majority of people?

08:34 <Regenaxer> Did already

08:34 <wineroots> Good

08:35 <Regenaxer> I'm really thinking of *no* licence at all

08:35 <Regenaxer> Anybody pick what she likes

08:35 <Regenaxer> It is an US-legal-system mess

08:36 <wineroots> Yes, indeed.

08:38 <Regenaxer> Here in Germany I care only about Copyright (Urheberrecht), which is not touched by such licences

08:38 <wineroots> Oh, cool

08:39 <Regenaxer> ☺

08:40 <wineroots> I checked even puthon & ruby use readline. This should not be an issue if they are used by major and minor corps worldwide. Unless, someone's aiming for a closed source fork let's say FutureLisp54

08:41 <wineroots> *python

08:41 <Regenaxer> I thought I saw that python uses libedit (editline)?

08:43 <Regenaxer> Hmm, just tried. python obeys my ~/.inputrc, so it seems to be readline

08:46 <Regenaxer> Mike Pechkin just told me in a private DeltaChat that MIT allows any other licence, so it is no problem anyway

08:46 <Regenaxer> Just keep it as it is?

08:51 <wineroots> Checking

08:53 <wineroots> According to gnu it should be compatible. http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:X11

08:53 <wineroots> MIT is x11 right?

08:53 <wineroots> Even software engineering SO has amswers saying so

08:53 <wineroots> https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/204497

08:54 <Regenaxer> Yeah

08:54 <Regenaxer> Just some people may not like it

08:55 <Regenaxer> cause they need *their* programs be GPL then

08:55 <wineroots> Picolisp code?

08:55 <wineroots> (de f ()(print "me gpl?"))

08:57 <wineroots> There would only be an issue if they were to remove readline and try to do things with without it. But, that's unlikely. This restriction is so a free software program does not become closed source in the future.

08:58 <Regenaxer> ok

08:58 <Regenaxer> so let's see if anyone complains in the ML again ;)

08:59 <wineroots> Sure! :D

10:00 <Regenaxer> OK, so it does not look like a problem :)

11:38 <Unscrmbl-aw> hello

11:38 <Unscrmbl-aw> for the record, picolisp was already MIT before i learned about picolisp

11:38 <Regenaxer> Hi Unscrmbl-aw

11:38 <Regenaxer> Ah, sorry! So it was someone else

11:38 <aw-> what happened?

11:39 <Regenaxer> Nothing so far

11:39 <aw-> what's the issue with readline?

11:39 <Regenaxer> Ah

11:39 <Regenaxer> All in the log here and in the mailing list

11:40 <aw-> ohh readline is GPL

11:40 <aw-> i see

11:41 <Regenaxer> yeah

11:41 <Regenaxer> But perhaps no problem as I see now

11:41 <aw-> yeah

11:41 <aw-> it's not a problem

11:42 <aw-> MIT is compatible with GPL

11:42 <Regenaxer> Very good

11:42 <aw-> you're not distributing readline are you?

11:42 <Regenaxer> correct

11:42 <aw-> ok, no problem

11:42 <Regenaxer> Thanks for clarification

11:43 <aw-> the notice on their website makes it seem as though "if you code against libreadline, your software must be GPL"

11:44 <aw-> but that is completely incorrect

11:44 <Regenaxer> hmm, yes, disturbing

11:47 <aw-> tbh though, readline is kinda shit

11:47 <aw-> what was wrong with the old approach?

11:48 <Regenaxer> lib/led.l was quite outdated

11:48 <Regenaxer> no direct support for emacs-mode

11:48 <Regenaxer> no support for .inputrc

11:48 <Regenaxer> People did not understand it

11:48 <Regenaxer> Everyone is used to readline

11:49 <aw-> but readline is garbage, building on top of garbage isn't usually a good idea

11:49 <aw-> i liked the old line editor

11:49 <aw-> worked perfectly for me

11:49 <Regenaxer> What is garbage in readline?

11:49 <Regenaxer> Works well

11:51 <aw-> big, bloated, gpl

11:52 <Regenaxer> hmm, is it so big?

11:53 <Regenaxer> here on Termux 344K

11:54 <Regenaxer> dynamically linked

11:54 <aw-> ok maybe not so bad

11:55 <aw-> anyways, linking to it during the build process is fine, so no license worries

11:55 <Regenaxer> Perfect

14:59 <DKordic> Welcome ym.

14:59 <DKordic> Re: readline; Patches welcomed.

15:12 <aw-> haha yeah right

19:03 <beneroth> "patches welcomed" is the same as saying "we're not sure if our software doesn't suck" no?

20:16 <ym> Maybe in commercial area, but not in open source freeware, IMO.

20:34 <beneroth> commercial software often sucks on purpose.