Amiga.org
Amigakit Hardware => A600GS & A1200NG => Topic started by: nbache on February 28, 2025, 04:47:31 PM
-
@amigakit
As I understood it, the previous maintainers (Jens and Thore) just resigned from the project, leaving it without current maintainers, but with the github and other infrastructure still intact. Since the project is open source, it would be natural, if you needed new features, to add them into the existing project, causing new nightly builds to emerge with those features for all supported platforms.
Or have I missed something?
Either way, yes, please, it would be very nice to get a new OS4 version with those "important bug fixes" you mentioned, even if it were only with the status of a fresh nightly dev build.
Best regards,
Niels
-
@nbache
We have already added up to date AmiSSL 5 support and fixed some important issues.
Was already done so nothing new...
https://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2022-07-00047-EN.html
https://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2024-03-00062-EN.html
Also where are the changed files? YAM is GPL-2.0
-
I haven't as yet.
Just tried for a quick test whilst building something else on the other machine, and it needs a bit of attention to build with the recent OS4 SDK when I have more time I might take bit more in depth look. Might be just used the wrong makefile options as it generated alot more warnings than I would expect.
I am pretty sure that it can be compiled for OS4 with the latest SDK. I have done that many times, and I am using that version for my emails.
-
We have already added up to date AmiSSL 5 support and fixed some important issues. An OS4 port would be perfectly feasible too.
Excuse me?!
https://github.com/jens-maus/yam/commit/ae0c0504e465741f53a1ec600b41ad3a3c211a2e (https://github.com/jens-maus/yam/commit/ae0c0504e465741f53a1ec600b41ad3a3c211a2e)
-
@futura
:-) thank you ! We don’t forget that your work and advice helped us add AmiSSL 5 support to YAM A600GS
-
As I understood it, the previous maintainers (Jens and Thore) just resigned from the project, leaving it without current maintainers, but with the github and other infrastructure still intact. Since the project is open source, it would be natural, if you needed new features, to add them into the existing project, causing new nightly builds to emerge with those features for all supported platforms.
Or have I missed something?
No, you haven't. The whole point of making YAM open source was to allow development to continue. Jens and Thore did a great job with the build environment, ensuring nightly builds are automatically built online at GitHub. It is released under GPL, so I cannot explain why Amigakit are attempting to steal the code (including the few changes I have made since Jens and Thore stopped working on it, claiming them as their own). Why not just contribute to the YAM repository so everyone can benefit and contribute?
It is like me reverting AmiSSL to closed source, after I took over all development - it would not have been the right thing to do.
-
@futura
:-) thank you ! We don’t forget that your work and advice helped us add AmiSSL 5 support to YAM A600GS
Um, pardon? I added it myself to the YAM repository in July 2022! YAM 2.10-dev with AmiSSL v5 support has been available to everyone shortly afterwards
-
@futaura
Any source code request will be honoured to any recipient. We are not stealing anything. That’s a sensationalist thing to say.
The changes and bugs we found with the timer have already been fed straight back to the Yam bug reports: https://github.com/jens-maus/yam/issues/727
This will continue with the latest bugs we found in the last few days.
This work took many hours to hunt and fix the bugs. The information fed back is for the benefit of the community.
Um, pardon? I added it myself to the YAM repository in July 2022! YAM 2.10-dev with AmiSSL v5 support has been available to everyone shortly afterwards
Yes I know, I think you are reading my comments wrong or I have not been as explicit enough with what I have written. We needed to add AmiSSL v5.17 support to our branch at the time. Your code, help and support made it possible for us to do that without having to reimplement it ourselves. That was appreciated.
-
our branch
Why branch at all?
Best regards,
Niels
-
@nbache
YAM will have specific features for the A600GS and A1200NG that are not applicable to the other platforms such as the Update system, ARM native features and integration with other A600GS system programs. We would not want to entangle the main line code with those platform specific features.
-
@futaura
The changes and bugs we found with the timer have already been fed straight back to the Yam bug reports: https://github.com/jens-maus/yam/issues/727
This will continue with the latest bugs we found in the last few days.
This work took many hours to hunt and fix the bugs. The information fed back is for the benefit of the community.
That's not how GitHub works. Bug fixes like this should be added as pull requests, not in bug reports, as I and others who have contributed to the project have done in the past.
-
@nbache
YAM will have specific features for the A600GS and A1200NG that are not applicable to the other platforms such as the Update system, ARM native features and integration with other A600GS system programs. We would not want to entangle the main line code with those platform specific features.
I am pretty sure you and your developers know that there is a way to have parts of code that are compiled only under specific hardware. This can be done at the level of the compiler.
So, you can still separate your code from the rest of the code base by using these technics, and still share the source with the official repository.
Now, if you do not want to share the custom HW specific code, you can have it in a separated library that will be your own with your own licence. So what you write above is not an excuse.
-
@walkero
developers
It’s just Broadblues, no need for plural.
Btw, the problem I see here is AmigaKit claiming copyright for YAM, that’s pure BS - they only have copyright for the specific code they added, the certainly cannot claim copyright on any of the code they did not write. The copyrights of everyone else who has contributed doesn’t magically vanish when you add your own code to it, this is not like “corporate” code where you can buy the whole thing and slap your copyrights on it - clearly AmigaKit does _not_ grasp GPL.
-
@kolla
Once again you are trying to create negativity about us and our projects. It is becoming a regular event.
We are not claiming the entire copyright. That is the precise reason we have left the other copyright notices inside the program to acknowledge the previous contributors.
Our copyright is the most recent covering the specific changes we have made.
Have you read any of the licence documentation we distribute with YAM ? My guess is No.
-
@kolla
Once again you are trying to create negativity about us and our projects. It is becoming a regular event.
I am not creating negativity, all the creation here is by yourself, I am merely pointing it out.
We are not claiming the entire copyright. That is the precise reason we have left the other copyright notices inside the program to acknowledge the previous contributors.
The splash gives the impression that you consider yourself the only current copyright holder, as if you have been granted all rights by previous developers and contributors.
Our copyright is the most recent covering the specific changes we have made.
Then to avoid this kind of turmoil, I suggest you change the splash to reflect that.
Have you read any of the licence documentation we distribute with YAM ? My guess is No.
Of course I have, it is GPL-2, and you cannot just change that. Are you saying you distribute YAM with other license documentation than that?
-
I am not creating negativity, all the creation here is by yourself, I am merely pointing it out.
No, I fully understand your agenda. Your past comment to my colleague about not liking AmigaKit made that very clear.
There are hundreds of A600GS users who are now enjoying the new YAM. Why are you not celebrating this new development? YAM has languished in nightly build status for years, untouched for years. I would imagine that welcome comments would be the first natural response rather than negativity? I do not see this from you or the few others who have hijacked this thread. This has to be questioned.
The splash gives the impression that you consider yourself the only current copyright holder
No it does not. The splash window highlights the succession of development from Marcel Beck to YAM Development Team to us.
The crux of the matter is that you do not like seeing AmigaKit investing time and resources into further development of Marcel Beck's creation. You also do not like to see the AmigaKit name added to this list of developers.
Of course I have, it is GPL-2, and you cannot just change that. Are you saying you distribute YAM with other license documentation than that?
We have not removed or diminished any of the legal notices. In fact we have ensured that past contributors to the project have been documented.
-
No, I fully understand your agenda. Your past comment to my colleague about not liking AmigaKit made that very clear.
So what is my agenda? Really, in all seriousness, I wish that AmigaKit could be a much better actor in the community instead of pissing off people all the time, in all kinds of ways.
The crux of the matter is that you do not like seeing AmigaKit investing time and resources into further development of Marcel Beck's creation. You also do not like to see the AmigaKit name added to this list of developers.
Nonsense, I have nothing against AmigaKit actually contributing to development of Amiga software, I especially welcome AmigaKit to contribute to open source Amiga software. However, the way you go about, it looks a lot more like "bringing in-house" rather than contributions.
I suppose you have nothing against anyone extracting Yam and various other open source software from their A600GS and uploading it to Aminet or whatever?
-
No it does not. The splash window highlights the succession of development from Marcel Beck to YAM Development Team to us.
Let's say that tomorrow some crazy guys from the community pushes changes to the Yam repository and a new version can be created. This will be Yam v2.10, based on the repo versioning. But there will also be Yam v2.10, the one you released. Both of these versions have different features and fixes. Which is the official, and which is the fake? Can you see the huge problem you are causing here?
I wonder if the Yam development team provided you any licence or the freedom to release new versions of Yam, outside their channels. Or if you bought the rights to release Yam from now on. I haven't seen any announcement, that's why I am asking.
And before I am accused of having my own agenda, just because I do not agree with your practices, I would like to clarify that I am happy you are updating Yam.
But you have to do it in the right way, following the licence and respecting the original authors and the Amiga community. And the Amiga community is not only our customers.
If you want to make things right, but you do not know how, here are some tips for you:
1. Share the changes to the official Yam repo by creating PRs
2. Reverse the changes in the About window to the original ones, and do not claim that you have a copyright on the application, when you do not
3. Reverse the version to the original one, as it is in the repo.
4. Teach the developers of your team how to respect others' work
5. Apologise to the community for what you have done and the wrong decisions you took.
If you do not want to do the above, then you should:
1. Create a new product with an entirely different name and versioning, like all the forks are done in the open-source world
2. Keep on providing the source code to anyone who asks for it, giving plenty of information in the documentation that comes with your app
3. Provide the Yams licence files with the source code
4. If you need to close parts of your changes, do it in a separated library.
If you fail to do any of the above, that will be a proof that you want to trick your own customers, providing them stolen applications, presenting yourself as the successor when you are not.
So, as you can see, you have options. Do the right thing.
-
@walkero
We are not going to be bullied by your aggressive behaviour or any others in your cabal.
We will adhere to the legal requirements of the licence.
-
@walkero
We will adhere to the legal requirements of the licence.
Then you will have nothing against that someone else do the work for you, buys an A600GS and thereby gets access to Yam 2.10, then asks you for the sources, which you will have to offer according to license, and ensures that all changes also are available in the actual YAM source repo, at least in its own branch. Right?
-
Sure. We are looking forward to your order.
-
@walkero
We are not going to be bullied by your aggressive behaviour or any others in your cabal.
We will adhere to the legal requirements of the licence.
I just asked you to make the right thing, based on the ethical spirit of the open source. I also provided some ways to do it. Instead of doing so, you are accusing me for bulling? Well done.
-
Then you will have nothing against that someone else do the work for you, buys an A600GS and thereby gets access to Yam 2.10
Just so we're clear: nobody has to buy anything. YAM is and will forever be freely distributable. Amigakit is free to limit access to their branch to only the A600GS customers, but all of these customers can distribute it any way they see fit.
In fact, I'm hereby asking if anybody who has access to it would send me a copy, so I can request the source code from Amigakit and add it to Aminet and/or Github. You can contact me via aminet@aminet.net, team@amiga-news.de or - if you prefer to stay anonymous - simply upload it somewhere and use our news submission form (https://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/tell-news/)
-
@cgutjahr
I agree, YAM will always be freely distributable. That is the nature of the licence which we adhere to.
Last October we found a timer problem in YAM afer many hours of hunting down the bug. We promptly reported the code fix in the YAM repo bug reports. Recently we have found and fixed two more bugs in RecipientString GoActive and GoInactive method. These code changes will be fed back to the YAM repo after the weekend when we are back in office. Going forward, we will always feed back bugs and improvements to the main repo for the benefit of the main YAM sources.
-
@cgutjahr
I agree, YAM will always be freely distributable. That is the nature of the licence which we adhere to.
Last October we found a timer problem in YAM afer many hours of hunting down the bug. We promptly reported the code fix in the YAM repo bug reports. Recently we have found and fixed two more bugs in RecipientString GoActive and GoInactive method. These code changes will be fed back to the YAM repo after the weekend when we are back in office. Going forward, we will always feed back bugs and improvements to the main repo for the benefit of the main YAM sources.
Sounds good, thank you!
(And thanks for forking the thread; I didn't expect to cause such a long discussion, but YAM is important to me as a user.)
Best regards,
Niels
-
Going forward, we will always feed back bugs and improvements to the main repo for the benefit of the main YAM sources.
This is great news, thank you!
-
I am pretty sure that it can be compiled for OS4 with the latest SDK. I have done that many times, and I am using that version for my emails.
Well I was just a quick test, I simply replace os3 target name with the hostname in my meta buildscsript, but ofcourse the hostname is AmigaOS and the target name is os4 , nothing like consistency :-) . Just typing gmake, it builds until it fall over an ACCESS_READ instead of a SHARED_LOCK.
-
These code changes will be fed back to the YAM repo after the weekend when we are back in office. Going forward, we will always feed back bugs and improvements to the main repo for the benefit of the main YAM sources.
Thank you.
That only leaves the naming issue: Official YAM versions are released from the official Github repository, which is currently maintained by Oliver/futaura. Third parties should not release "YAM 2.11" or any other releases labeled just "YAM" - it's confusing and doesn't show much respect for the people who actually made this. Simply calling it "YAM-GS" or something like that would solve this problem.
-
Well I was just a quick test, I simply replace os3 target name with the hostname in my meta buildscsript, but ofcourse the hostname is AmigaOS and the target name is os4 , nothing like consistency :-) . Just typing gmake, it builds until it fall over an ACCESS_READ instead of a SHARED_LOCK.
I do not remember by heart, but I believe you need to pass a definition to use the DOS obsolete for things like that on OS4.
-
@cgutjahr
If you look at the screenshots, you will see that this project is already named as "YAM 2.10 [A600GS/m68k]"
This is to inform the user that it is a separate project.
-
@amigakit:
If you look at the screenshots, you will see that this project is already named as "YAM 2.10 [A600GS/m68k]"
No it's not. Your own release notes call it "YAM", the program icon is called "YAM", the splash screen says "YAM" and the page in your wiki exclusively talks about "YAM". You did add "[A600GS/m68k]" to the version number, but that's not the same as renaming the application - and you know that.
Could you just simply confirm that the name "YAM" is not yours to use? That would be a good start, because currently it sounds a lot like you just want this discussion to go away so you can continue to do what you're doing.
Btw., when looking at your wiki page about "YAM", I found this gem:
AmigaKit Ltd adopted development of YAM for it's computer platforms after the YAM Development Team announced in April 2022 that they had discontinued development.
You just claimed in this very thread, that your version is a fork and that it is not called YAM, while your wiki claims you "adopted development of YAM". Maybe you should make up your mind?
Not to mention that this paragraph is factually incorrect, of course. Futaura - the guy who "helped you" to add AmiSSL5 support to YAM, remember? - "adopted development" of YAM. He's got access to to official repository, so he's the guy one (i.e. you) talks to re naming issues.
-
I am sorry, I disagree with you. There are no restrictions in the licence preventing us to use the YAM name and no trademark notices. If you can point out information to the contrary, I will of course review it. Our users expect it to be called YAM. However, we have distinguished it in the splash window by the clarification that this a different version [A600/M68K]. We can add an A600GS logo to the YAM logo image if that helps?
AmigaKit Ltd adopted development of YAM for it's computer platforms after the YAM Development Team announced in April 2022 that they had discontinued development.
You are not reading this carefully enough. What are AmigaKit Ltd's computer platforms? Well in this immediate case they are A600GS and A1200NG.
YAM Development has been discontinued (https://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2022-04-00095-EN.html) and it has been some years since it has been updated in beta/nightly build. Therefore we have to adopt the code for the A600GS/A1200NG computer systems. Realistically who else is going to develop YAM for our platforms? Development costs money and it would be wonderful if the mainline YAM was not discontinued and still being developed. In that scenario, we would not need to put resources into a dedicated version for our own platforms.
-
There are no restrictions in the licence preventing us to use the YAM name and no trademark notices.
Please stop playing games - the GPL obviously doesn't cover naming rights, but copyright for code.
The name YAM belongs to the people who have been maintaining YAM. People can fork open source projects all they want, that's the whole idea of free software. But they leave the name alone - unless the last maintainer donates it to them.
Our users expect it to be called YAM.
So you didn't rename it.
YAM Development has been discontinued (https://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2022-04-00095-EN.html) and it has been some years since it has been updated in beta/nightly build.
This is Nonsense. Why would you and your "team" (hi Andy!) make bugreports in the official YAM bug tracker if "Development has been discontinued"? Why would you "feed code changes back to the YAM repo after the weekend"?
And, again: Futaura - the guy you thanked for "helping" you to add AmiSSL 5 support to YAM in this very thread - is making new releases (https://www.amiga-news.de/de/news/AN-2024-03-00062-DE.html).
Realistically who else is going to develop YAM for our platforms?
You can port existing YAM releases to your platforms. If you want to make new releases, call it SystemV54Mail or some other catchy name.
You're the guy who sent a C&D to Amiga Addict magazine and who put his own (C) stickers on other people's A1200 cases. You do not get the benefit of the doubt. Ever.
[Edit: it's "Amiga Addict", not "Amiga Passion"]
-
I do not remember by heart, but I believe you need to pass a definition to use the DOS obsolete for things like that on OS4.
Yes but YAMs src is mostly Amiga OS4 centric , with other targets adapted to match in extrasrc.h , so that file needs updating to fit in with that approach, though S4 isn't my priority at present, the recent critical issues addressed are A600GS/AROS/Zune combo specific.
-
@cgutjahr
The name YAM belongs to the people who have been maintaining YAM
Does filing bug reports and source code fixes count as maintenance?
Depending on that: YAM (like the other projects) is an open source project. If you like, you are welcome to create a fork of it and start developing immediately.
Quoted from Amiga News (24/04/2022) (https://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2022-04-00095-EN.html)
So you didn't rename it.
It has YAM prominently in the name and splash screen graphics in addition to [A600/M68K] and the version number etc.
This is Nonsense. Why would you and your "team" (hi Andy!) make bugreports in the official YAM bug tracker if "Development has been discontinued"? Why would you "feed code changes back to the YAM repo after the weekend"?
Because that is a decision that has been taken with every open source project we have been working on. We gave back code to AmiBerry, AROS and YAM. Anyone else in future who wants to fork the discontinued YAM project can benefit from the bugs that took many hours to find and fix. Anyone who is fed up with the bugs we found can compile their own private copy too.
And, again: Futaura - the guy you thanked for "helping" you to add AmiSSL 5 support to YAM in this very thread - is making new releases.
Futaura made a nightly/beta build in 2022 - not a new public release. We incorporated his code into our YAM A600GS public release. He was very helpful with pointing me to the beta code using AmiSSL last September- it saved us a lot of time having to implement it ourselves. I informed him by reply that we encountered a Timer bug which took us a week to hunt down. When it was resolved Futaura was also informed that a bug report (and solution) was filed in the hope he knew of any developers still working on YAM.
call it SystemV54Mail
Thanks for the marketing suggestion, I think YAM sounds better.
-
Does filing bug reports and source code fixes count as maintenance?
More word games. You're not one the maintainers, end of story.
Futaura made a nightly/beta build in 2022
He made several, the last one - which I just linked to - is less than year old.
Thanks for the marketing suggestion, I think YAM sounds better.
Okay, so what you actually meant when you said "we renamed our version" is "YAM is mine now"?
-
Does filing bug reports and source code fixes count as maintenance?
Not really, we do this all the time to various projects both in private and as part of my work, but that makes me a contributor at best, not a maintainer - a maintainer is someone who does the overall work of managing and maintaining the project and its resources.
It has YAM prominently in the name and splash screen graphics in addition to [A600/M68K] and the version number etc.
Whoops.
this a different version [A600/M68K].
Whoops.
We gave back code to AmiBerry, AROS and YAM.
Have you added copyright claims on AmiBerry and AROS as well.
When something says "Copyright 2002-2022" doesn't mean the copyright ends in 2022, it means at least 50 years more. Marcel Beck explicitly gave away YAM to the YAM Open Source Team, but the YAM Open Source Team has not explicitly given away YAM to AmigaKit.
Futaura made a nightly/beta build in 2022 - not a new public release.
The nightly beta builds (2024, not 2022) were/are publicly released and publicly available, so what are you talking about?
We incorporated his code into our YAM A600GS public release.
This, however... public release?