Gph != Gpl?

[Alpha2]

Prehaps they simply want to shake out some of the issues before releaseing the Source? I mean seriously whats the point of releaseing buggy assed code? it helps NO ONE. Let then get a handle on it corral it a bit and then they can give you something really good to work with.

 

[Puck2099]

Prehaps they simply want to shake out some of the issues before releaseing the Source? I mean seriously whats the point of releaseing buggy assed code? it helps NO ONE. Let then get a handle on it corral it a bit and then they can give you something really good to work with.

​

If they release a buggy code, people could study their code and fix the bugs for them so it's something good for everybody <_<

OK, everybody say to give GPH a chance. What day looks good to start asking them for the source code? In a month time? After releasing GP2X worlwide? I bet that day they will continue without releasing code but we still continue giving them more chances...

 

[gp2brew]

Ok, so this thread is getting a bit out of hand.

Come on, there's no need to be getting defensive of GPH or attacking people who are defending the GPL concept. No-one is trying to take down GPH here, as I've pointed out when the GPL is not honoured things can get nasty.

Look, it is getting nasty already.

Now, I'm sure that if GPH knew the full extent of the GPL license they would be forthright and upfront in providing the source code. There's no debating this, GPL is GPL and this is supposed to be an open source homebrewing community. I mean, isn't that what we're doing here?

Yes, so we're all proud of our open source community and our open source handhelds, yet as Puck is getting frustrated trying to point out through a language barrier (can we give people from other countries just a bit of a break btw?), if GPH doesn't honour the GPL then the new community they are attracting of Linux users in a much larger and very active open source community then they are going to cause themselves some very bad publicity.

I don't want this to happen, I'm sure no-one here does.

So, instead of this pointless debating, flaming and negativity towards people who are just trying to air a serious issue, how about a concerted effort to make sure that GPH do follow the letter of the GPL?

After all, there's no reason why they wouldn't honour the GPL is there?

 

[Winterkid]

If you keep threatening/demanding source from devs/businesses, then they might just withhold ALL info about upcoming games/products until they're finished, completely, which means CLOSED beta tests, very little info about works in progress, Devs switching to closed source only to avoid it and in general just being more closed off from the community.

 

[codesmith]

Puck2099 and Timofonic are your basic "stick it to the man" types, I mean look at this:

I can't understand why talking about GPH like being friends, they are a corporation that sells a product, if giving the GP2X for free, then it can be very different...

GPH is a corporation that sells a product!!! OMFG! teh 3vil!!!

Give me a break. Newsflash kiddies, we're not living in a Gibson novel. Yes, some corporations are evil, but not all of them. GPH is showing that they really care about our needs as users (as opposed to just making a quick buck and screw the users), and all you care about is whether they release the source code. Guess what, unless you own the device, you're not entitled to the source code. I'm quite sure that neither of you own one, and I'd be willing to bet that you haven't even ordered one. Besides, most of the source code is already out there, the only thing missing is a few device drivers, which means that you're kicking up a fuss over technicalities.

(Oh, and in case you're thinking of replying "it's the MMSP2 source, not the GP2x source", I'll just go ahead and ask if you've thought of harrassing Dell for not releasing the Linux source for the Intel chipsets they use. Same situation.)

 

[codesmith]

If you keep threatening/demanding source from devs/businesses, then they might just withhold ALL info about upcoming games/products until they're finished, completely, which means CLOSED beta tests, very little info about works in progress, Devs switching to closed source only to avoid it and in general just being more closed off from the community.

​

If that happens, these idiots just move somewhere else and get on their soapbox about the evils of closed source and how Microsoft is using their illegal monopoly to push companies away from OSS.

 

[Puck2099]

Puck2099 and Timofonic are your basic "stick it to the man" types, I mean look at this:

I can't understand why talking about GPH like being friends, they are a corporation that sells a product, if giving the GP2X for free, then it can be very different...

GPH is a corporation that sells a product!!! OMFG! teh 3vil!!!

Give me a break. Newsflash kiddies, we're not living in a Gibson novel. Yes, some corporations are evil, but not all of them. GPH is showing that they really care about our needs as users (as opposed to just making a quick buck and screw the users), and all you care about is whether they release the source code. Guess what, unless you own the device, you're not entitled to the source code. I'm quite sure that neither of you own one, and I'd be willing to bet that you haven't even ordered one. Besides, most of the source code is already out there, the only thing missing is a few device drivers, which means that you're kicking up a fuss over technicalities.

(Oh, and in case you're thinking of replying "it's the MMSP2 source, not the GP2x source", I'll just go ahead and ask if you've thought of harrassing Dell for not releasing the Linux source for the Intel chipsets they use. Same situation.)

​

First of all, I haven't insulted anybody, so please, don't call me 'idiot' <_<

Your example about Dell is not valid, if you ask Dell they will give you the source code of all GPL licensed Linux software, but not the closed source modules. GPH could do the same, give us the modified GPL kernel and write from scratch their own modules and reserve them.

I was thinking about re-releasing my games with a GPL license so everybody could modify it, but after seing the respect that most people have about licenses and the future protection that users could give me, I'm changing my opinion...

Respect to 'unless you own the device, you're not entitled to the source code', you are wrong. And please, let me know what of the following points is GPH doing:

3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

B) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

By the way, I have my GP2X preordered since August, and you?

Regards

 

[Oscaruzzo]

Besides, most of the source code is already out there, the only thing missing is a few device drivers, which means that you're kicking up a fuss over technicalities.

​

Sadly, it's not a "technicality". Many people (included myself) hope to "experiment" a lot both with the kernel and with the SDL as soon as they get the device. But you can't really do any changes to the OS if it's not complete, since it won't surely work.

So, (for now) I'm not in haste at all, since I don't have the device. But I sure hope to get my hands on that source as soon as possible. (BTW I don't feel very comfortable with the "will be released when it's finished" party, probably because my background is founded on "release early, release often" i.e. "share all your plans and keep everybody up to date". But that's just an opinion, the "bytes" are all that matters )

 

[gaterooze]

Prehaps they simply want to shake out some of the issues before releaseing the Source?

This is what they have stated on their web site.

 

[finraziel]

Just to clarify, the only reason I was shooting off was someone was threatening to go turn GPH over to some organization. That would not help anyone, and just because someone knows about it but hasnt released the source code yet doesn't mean they wont. I just think people should reflect a little on the words common courtesy.
(and in case the "foreign" bit was directed at me, I was serious that I didn't mean to knock him for his language but didn't really understand what he was trying to say. Btw english isn't my first language either).

 

[Ravnos]

Respect to 'unless you own the device, you're not entitled to the source code', you are wrong.

​

Actually, no, he's not. The GPL states that you're only entitled to the source if you receive a binary copy of the software. Since effectively the only way to get a binary copy of the GP2X firmware at the moment is with the GP2X, you're not entitled to shit until you get it. There's nothing in the GPL that says you have to put your software and source on the internet for everyone to download freely, but it does allow anyone who receives a copy to do just that if they want.

 

[Cyclops]

Just to clarify, the only reason I was shooting off was someone was threatening to go turn GPH over to some organization. That would not help anyone, and just because someone knows about it but hasnt released the source code yet doesn't mean they wont. I just think people should reflect a little on the words common courtesy.
(and in case the "foreign" bit was directed at me, I was serious that I didn't mean to knock him for his language but didn't really understand what he was trying to say. Btw english isn't my first language either).

​

GPL does need to be enforced, do they need to be threatened? Absolutely not, its a last resort thing. I have noticed that GPH have said they will "when ready" which is not a good enough answer, and I notice people who have asked for the code, and have failed to get the code. The reality is though if no-one here is capable of negotiation with GPH, the correct organisation needs to be contacted. I assume these organisations aren't scum, they wouldn't do what they do if they were, and are probable 10X more likely to be aware of how to get things done.

So an organisation if negotiations don't work, needs to be involved, and soon, but its not a lets get em!! In reality GPH will benefit just as much.

 

[lucoxade]

Whos to say that the kernel source isn't the same one as the MMSP2 kernel? Has anyone thats bitching about it even looked at it! All the features of the GP2X are already included so there wouldn't be that much for GPH to change??

Everything else that makes the GP2X what it is is likely to be there own scripts and software, they do not need to give us this source.

If you want to play with the source to do something useful on the GP2X download the MMSP2 kernel and let us know how you get on mmkay?

 

[Oscaruzzo]

Whos to say that the kernel source isn't the same one as the MMSP2 kernel? Has anyone thats bitching about it even looked at it! All the features of the GP2X are already included so there wouldn't be that much for GPH to change??

Everything else that makes the GP2X what it is is likely to be there own scripts and software, they do not need to give us this source.

If you want to play with the source to do something useful on the GP2X download the MMSP2 kernel and let us know how you get on mmkay?

​

It's not the same.

For example, the MMSP2 kernel only supports 640x480 and 800x600 for the fbcon, but the gp2x is 320x240 (ok this one is easy to fix).

The MMSP2 USB host/device is unused since it only supports USB1.1. The gp2x has an extra USB chip for USB2.0 support.

Of course nobody expects BIG changes, but of course even small changes can make the diffence... And BTW, i'm not "bitching" at all, i'm quite confident the source will somehow be released. Just hope it happens as soon as possible.

 

[codesmith]

I was thinking about re-releasing my games with a GPL license so everybody could modify it, but after seing the respect that most people have about licenses and the future protection that users could give me, I'm changing my opinion...

If you're such a proponent of the GPL, why didn't you release your games under the GPL to begin with? Oh, I know... you haven't actually released anything yet have you? You're nothing but a GPL zealot, I don't know why I'm wasting my time talking to you.

By the way, I have my GP2X preordered since August, and you?

​

Is that the best you can do? Since this is, as far as I'm concerned, the end of the conversation, I might as well answer: yes, I have preordered too, from gp32z.

 

[weirdspawningkid]

She is aware of the issue, but she doesn't do anything  :angry:

You're right, maybe the best is not do anything and let FSF know about it.

​

Is your girlfriend going to die unless you get the source code RIGHT NOW or something?
Seriously, where do these impatient people come from? GPH is not out to ruin your life dude, give them a chance.

​

Since it's illegal, not excuses for violating GPL, you can't say violated GPL because your dog eated the source code or your mother put in the trash

http://www.gp2x.com/support/support_sugest...=01&chk=&direc=

​

No that was terribly racist and your going to think I'm a white british thug.

 

[Puck2099]

If you're such a proponent of the GPL, why didn't you release your games under the GPL to begin with? Oh, I know... you haven't actually released anything yet have you? You're nothing but a GPL zealot, I don't know why I'm wasting my time talking to you.

Sorry? Have you even tried to look for 'Puck2099' in GP32x File Archive?

http://www.gp32x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,25,486

http://www.gp32x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,27,601

Uhm, have you released something with another nickname? I can't see anything looking for 'codesmith'...

 

[Puck2099]

Actually, no, he's not. The GPL states that you're only entitled to the source if you receive a binary copy of the software. Since effectively the only way to get a binary copy of the GP2X firmware at the moment is with the GP2X, you're not entitled to shit until you get it. There's nothing in the GPL that says you have to put your software and source on the internet for everyone to download freely, but it does allow anyone who receives a copy to do just that if they want.

​

Sorry, it's not right.

There are binary copies of the GP2X firmware availables to download from GPH website since a month: link to download firmware.

The GPL says that if you make available to download this firmware, you must provide the source code too.

Regards

 

[codesmith]

If you're such a proponent of the GPL, why didn't you release your games under the GPL to begin with?  Oh, I know... you haven't actually released anything yet have you?  You're nothing but a GPL zealot, I don't know why I'm wasting my time talking to you.

Sorry? Have you even tried to look for 'Puck2099' in GP32x File Archive?

http://www.gp32x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,25,486

http://www.gp32x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,27,601

Uhm, have you released something with another nickname? I can't see anything looking for 'codesmith'...

​

OK, so I made an incorrect assumption. You still haven't said why you didn't release under the GPL to begin with.

You want to see some of my GPL code? Try here. I'm the author of the original floppy controller code in fdc.zip. Hard real-time code that hits the hardware directly, accessing the floppy controller hardware and DMA controller. All written in portable C with the x86 PC parts segregated so they can be easily replaced. Which is why both FreeDOS32 and Cottontail use it. That was way back before armchair GPL "lawyers" soured me on that particular license.

 

[Puck2099]

OK, so I made an incorrect assumption. You still haven't said why you didn't release under the GPL to begin with.

Well, as I have coded them from scratch I can release the source code under whatever license I want or not release at all, but my idea is to do it as GPL.

Samurai has been ported to SDL and I'm waiting until Oankali releases a final version of one library that I use before release the code under the GPL.

Lady Killer's source will be released as soon as I finish version 1.0.

You want to see some of my GPL code? Try here. I'm the author of the original floppy controller code in fdc.zip. Hard real-time code that hits the hardware directly, accessing the floppy controller hardware and DMA controller. All written in portable C with the x86 PC parts segregated so they can be easily replaced. Which is why both FreeDOS32 and Cottontail use it. That was way back before armchair GPL "lawyers" soured me on that particular license.

​

That's what I don't understand. If you have released your source as GPL and know how it works, how can't you been upset after seeing GPH is violating that license?

I prefer to speak with you when you don't insult me or use rude words

Regards