YAM Licence

[kolla]

@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?

[amigakit]

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.

[kolla]

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?

[walkero]

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.

[amigakit]

@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.

[kolla]

@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?

[amigakit]

Sure.  We are looking forward to your order.

[walkero]

@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.

[cgutjahr]

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

[amigakit]

@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.

[nbache]

@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

[sean_sk]

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!

[broadblues]

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.

[cgutjahr]

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.

[walkero]

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.

[amigakit]

@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.