Read this if you've found software useful to ReactOS

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
mf
Developer
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 2:37 pm
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Read this if you've found software useful to ReactOS

Post by mf » Sat May 19, 2007 1:19 am

Because lots of people post software on the forum that might be useful to include with the ReactOS base installation, I've made a question chart to make sure only useful programs get suggested.

Ready? Go!

Image

Hope this clears everything up.
It compiles, let's ship it!

Cristan
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:41 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Cristan » Sat May 19, 2007 1:50 am

Great chart! I think it can be really useful and I totally agree with it! Perhaps you could host the image on reactos.org in stead of imageshack, because I can see how this file could be handy for quite some time.

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos » Sat May 19, 2007 4:30 am

What about MIT license?

mf
Developer
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 2:37 pm
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Post by mf » Sat May 19, 2007 11:25 am

Haos wrote:What about MIT license?
I don't know, I just took this off wikipedia.
It compiles, let's ship it!

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Sat May 19, 2007 12:20 pm

1. Interesting, but what about make it dynamic (maybe a part of the compatibility database submission form) ? It would also be great to have a color compatibility-like approach too...

2. I think the path from the step 2 should divide into GPL compatible or GPL incompatible.
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

mf
Developer
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 2:37 pm
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Post by mf » Sat May 19, 2007 1:00 pm

forart wrote:2. I think the path from the step 2 should divide into GPL compatible or GPL incompatible.
Yes, that's what I did. I don't get your point?
It compiles, let's ship it!

dreams
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:23 am
Location: Holland
Contact:

Post by dreams » Sun May 20, 2007 12:29 am

Excellent chart, should be in a faq!

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Sun May 20, 2007 3:56 am

Haos wrote:What about MIT license?
MIT License is comparable to the BSD/X11 licenses. For that matter, I think for a time the X Windows system was under the MIT license, if it still isn't.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Sun May 20, 2007 7:21 am

MIT license does not exist. Most cases what people think is the MIT licence is the Expat License. That is GPL compatible.

For simplisty I would have myself just pointed them to http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/i ... leLicenses
<addon> Or place a copy of that on reactos in the wiki. So that new licenses don't need updating of chart. </addon>

Phobos
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:50 pm

Post by Phobos » Sun May 20, 2007 2:27 pm

MIT license does exist, it is also called X license or X11 license (which is on the chart), and it's a lot like BSD

Expat happens to use a MIT license for distribution, along with putty and others

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php

andrewweb
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Utility Toolbar

Post by andrewweb » Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:12 pm

:D Great chart, does COMPILED, pure delphi qualify(it is pure win32, unlike vbasic!).

Look in the suggestions section for my bit about Utilituy toolbar(PLEASE include it!) :D

Phalanx
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 12:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: Utility Toolbar

Post by Phalanx » Sat Jun 02, 2007 5:56 am

andrewweb wrote::D Great chart, does COMPILED, pure delphi qualify(it is pure win32, unlike vbasic!).

Look in the suggestions section for my bit about Utilituy toolbar(PLEASE include it!) :D
That is the very problem. The project is open source, and meant to be compiled with as little other tools/libraries etc as possible. That is why they state C/C++, not win32 binaries. Even while in win32 it can matter if it is a win32, MFC, etc.

.aart3k
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:21 am

Post by .aart3k » Sat Jun 02, 2007 8:28 am

yes, MIT aka. X11 (included in chart) is used by xorg.
BSD also gives you permission to use organization/people names in the name of your derived software promotion

mf
Developer
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 2:37 pm
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Re: Utility Toolbar

Post by mf » Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:34 pm

andrewweb wrote::D Great chart, does COMPILED, pure delphi qualify(it is pure win32, unlike vbasic!).

Look in the suggestions section for my bit about Utilituy toolbar(PLEASE include it!) :D
Delphi is derived from Pascal, which is on the chart.
It compiles, let's ship it!

FSX
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:23 am

Post by FSX » Sun Jun 03, 2007 1:16 pm

Why isn't the Xfree86 license GNU compatible? All it says is that you need to say ROS was made using fooware, if you use fooware to make something else. Or does that violate the GNU's strict, enslaving terms on those matters?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests