On 2/11/10, James Long longster@gmail.com wrote:

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:56 PM, REPLeffect repleffect@gmail.com wrote:

...

James (and Marc),

I've looked and I don't see anything about licensing on the Gambit Scheme backend. I believe James said he started with Marc's code and fleshed it out from there, so I'll direct the question to both of you. What are the license terms for using this code? Does it fall under the same licenses as Gambit itself?

Yes, that's probably appropriate. Honestly, I haven't have much experience with licenses. I know Gambit is release under a dual LGPL and Apache 2 license. Do I just need to add those two license files in the root of the project?

• James

You should probably coordinate with Marc, since you started with his code. One simple way to do it would be to add a comment to the code similar to what Gambit's docs have:

"The Gambit-C system release v4.6.0 is Copyright 1994-2009 by Marc Feeley, all rights reserved. The Gambit-C system release v4.6.0 is licensed under two licenses: the Apache License, Version 2.0, and the GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, Version 2.1. You have the option to choose which of these two licenses to abide by. The licenses are copied below."

Instead of saying "The licenses are copied below", you could say something like "see the files LICENSE-2.0.txt and LGPL.txt which should have been included with this file for the details of each license." -- those are the two files that are currently included with Gambit that contain the information for each license.

Again, I would suggest getting with Marc and getting his approval, since you started with his code, and the two of you can work out the copyright wording.

And, of course, you *should* include the two license files (the root of the project seems a logical place for them to me).

On 2/11/10, Marc Feeley feeley@iro.umontreal.ca wrote:

On 2010-02-11, at 2:25 PM, REPLeffect wrote:

...

You should probably coordinate with Marc, since you started with his code. One simple way to do it would be to add a comment to the code similar to what Gambit's docs have:

"The Gambit-C system release v4.6.0 is Copyright 1994-2009 by Marc Feeley, all rights reserved. The Gambit-C system release v4.6.0 is licensed under two licenses: the Apache License, Version 2.0, and the GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, Version 2.1. You have the option to choose which of these two licenses to abide by. The licenses are copied below."

Instead of saying "The licenses are copied below", you could say something like "see the files LICENSE-2.0.txt and LGPL.txt which should have been included with this file for the details of each license." -- those are the two files that are currently included with Gambit that contain the information for each license.

Again, I would suggest getting with Marc and getting his approval, since you started with his code, and the two of you can work out the copyright wording.

The copyright should belong to those who have contributed (code) to the project. So I suggest the file start with a copyright statement followed by the name of all the contributors. The copyright and the license are two different things. The license should be the same as for Gambit so that all can be packaged together eventually.

Marc

I guess I shouldn't have tried to shorten my last message. :-) I had originally written out an example that said Copyright 2009-2010 Marc Feeley and James Long, but decided against making the message so detailed (and because I didn't know for sure if anyone else had contributed code). Marc is right, the copyright is a separate issue -- but they are related, since those who control copyright decide how the code is licensed. It would be good to have both of those things nailed down early on just to avoid any confusion (and to encourage others to use the code).

Alright, I have added the licenses to swank-gambit. It is released under a dual LGPL and Apache 2 license just like Gambit. See the updated project here:

http://github.com/jlongster/swank-gambit

I also noticed that Gambit (and swank-gambit) has this line at the top of each file:

;;; File: "swank-gambit.scm", Time-stamp: <2010-02-15 19:08:52 james>

I think I like this, and I have added the `time-stamp` procedure to my save hook in Emacs to fix the timestamp in swank-gambit. Marc, do you manually write out this line every time you make a new file, or is there something in Emacs to automatically generate this? There's two things that might be annoying about this:

* Renaming files and forgetting to update the filename. Why is the filename included? * Saving files back to their original content (compared to last commit in version control), but VC still marks the file as changed because the timestamp is different

I'm more prepared for the first point of renaming to become an issue. I'm going to try it out though.

- James

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Adrien Piérard pierarda@iro.umontreal.ca wrote:

...

;;; File: "swank-gambit.scm", Time-stamp: <2010-02-15 19:08:52 james>

...

save hook in Emacs to fix the timestamp in swank-gambit.  Marc, do you manually write out this line every time you make a new file, or is there something in Emacs to automatically generate this?  There's two things that might be annoying about this:

Err, isn't it just the chain $Id$ which is automatically updated by the VCS ? CVS used to do that, and I'm pretty sure git/mercurial do it too…

git doesn't do it, I'm pretty sure. You're right though, I forgot that CVS did it, and it looks like a line which would be controlled by a VCS.

I initially received the file outside of version control and it still had the line, so that made me think Marc generated it some other way (unless it was in a local repo but he just emailed me the file).

2010/2/16 Julian Scheid julians37@googlemail.com:

Thanks for adding the license, I'll push my repository when I have a few more minutes (tomorrow I think.)

Managed to squeeze this in,

http://github.com/jscheid/swank-gambit

Keep in mind this is work in progress and let me know how you go.

Cheers,

Julian

2010/2/16 James Long longster@gmail.com:

Ooo, inspections!  I hadn't used SLIME's inspector before, that is really cool!!  Good work!

Glad you like it. It needs more work, mainly support for all data types. Also I'm not sure about including the serial number since they are assigned the first time object->serial-number is called and so technically, just inspecting objects changes state. Maybe this could be configurable. And, as mentioned in the comments, it should really use streams when available. Any help with any of this is welcome.

Speaking of streams, is there a way to use Snow modules in Gambit without all the heavy infrastructure - and if so, is it documented anywhere? Say in case you wanted to use SRFI-40 on the iPhone where running Snow binaries is not an option, at least not a convenient one?

You didn't add "sort.scm" to the repo, so it can't find the file. When you get the chance, can you add it?  (I added my own sort.scm temporarily)

I've been using Marc's implementation from http://dynamo.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/wiki/index.php/Dumping_Grounds#Utilit... .

I'd rather not add a copy to the repository if it can be avoided, how about mentioning the dependency in the Readme instead?

I noticed that I also forgot to check in my patch for slime-presentations.lisp, will add that soon.

Julian