TOPIC:

Wouldn't it useful to choose one of the proved license-models from choosealicense.com/licenses/ for CT?
Also you should show the original license of the packages.

Your license is a common problem, lazarus users and developers did not use CT.

Klaus Riesterer wrote: Wouldn't it useful to choose one of the proved license-models from choosealicense.com/licenses/ for CT?
Also you should show the original license of the packages.
.....

-NO Sir we can't
-Please can you write, which CodeTyphon packages don't show the original license ?
we want to correct that...

Sorry, you missunderstand me. They show the original license but in the source. It would be great to see the original developer license/contact in the package-dialog, so it would be easier to contact the developer when there is a problem or some questions. You only show e.g.LGPL 2.0 but no develeoper/contact.

The most irritating part of your actual license is:
THE SOFTWARE MAY NOT BE SOLD, TRANSFERRED, OR FURTHER DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM PILOTLOGIC.

I understand this, but it is not what FOSS means. Many parts of CT are not compatible with your license but only your own development e.g. the CT-Center could be - or am I wrong?

Please I ask this because I like CT really much, not to troll you.
I have personal contact to many of the Lazarus people and so we also talk about CT many times, but noone will use it.
In commercial fields and for commercial development its a problem to use CT perhaps your license, so it is just for hobby.

Sir,
thanks for your opinion.

From our point of view your opinion is totally wrong, for many many reasons.

1) You did answer to my question: "Which CodeTyphon package(s) don't show the original license ?"
because this "Fairy Tail" use Lazarus-Trolls, 4 year now.

2) And YES, WE DO NOT CARE ABOUT LAZARUS IDE AND LAZARUS PEOPLE. I hope this to be very clear.

3) If you interesting so much for these people, then I think you are in wrong forum.

My suggestion is to read ALL CodeTyphon license file info
and if you don't AGREE with terms CT license please NOT use CodeTyphon.

.

++1
and from all PL-LAB programmers

We must keep out LAZARUS-Trolls from this forum.

I find that an inappropriate reaction. Calling myself a troll is not a fitting answer.
I just asked a factual question because I like CodeTyphon.
After all, I have been using this for years with pleasure and praise you and the product wherever possible.
I am thrilled with the services of PilotLogic and i use and like CT, which I always emphasize again!

Good morning,

at address www.pilotlogic.com/sitejoom/index.php/pr...ts/codetyphon-studio

I read "It's a NO cost, Free and Open-Source "Tera" Programming Studio,
which offers you the ability to build any kind of application, libraries, etc, Commercial or Non-Commercial without restrictions."

Now, i don't understand what's the problem, Can explain me? Lincese of CT or the single component library license used by CT?

Thanks in advance.

What I meant was that it is not really clear for which parts of the sources the CT-License is guilty. They should - in my opinion - declare it more in detail.
Which parts are Public Domain, which (L)GPL or other licensed.

I only asked, but now I should be a Troll - Don't know why.

It was a nice time with CT and PL but after Stefanos writing 'WE DO NOT CARE ABOUT LAZARUS IDE AND LAZARUS PEOPLE'
I decided to use Lazarus in future. I miss the respect for the real makers here.

As you use the source of the Lazarus People every day this is absolutly outrageous!

No one should byte the hand, feeding them!

Bye Sirs!

@ Superc: What you mention is not a license ...

The topic has closed....
Please respect our work