Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? (Announce)
> > I will disclose that this is not open source (yet). I am willing to
> talk
> > to people about code in private. It's not all done yet so I'd like to
> > keep some control before releasing my terror on the world. ;-0
> >
> > If you have comments or requests I try to be responsive.
>
> Thanks! AFAICS one can just download some applications, which include the
> statically linked TCP code. So the only tests which can be done are to try
> out these applications? Perhaps there's a possibility to provide at least a
> static library and a (small) documentation how your TCP API is supposed to
> be used? No big problem if the code is restricted to the Borland C v3.0
> compiler.
It might be time to take a different approach .. I should probably clean the code up and ship source code, not just libraries. I would not want to use a library without source, and other people probably don't want to either.
I would like to open source it but retain my personal copyright. I think that the GPL version three allows for this. I realize that some people might use the code in a way that might be irritating to me, but there is probably more benefit in making it open than not.
What licenses have people here used for their software? Have their been any 'gotchas'? (I am very familiar with open source software, but have never tried to maintain my own project.)
-Mike
---
mTCP - TCP/IP apps for vintage DOS machines!
http://www.brutman.com/mTCP
Complete thread:
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 21.01.2010, 18:06 (Announce)
![Open in board view [Board]](img/board_d.gif)
![Open in mix view [Mix]](img/mix_d.gif)
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - Japheth, 22.01.2010, 09:47
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 22.01.2010, 16:56
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 07.02.2010, 16:35
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 03:22
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - Rugxulo, 14.03.2010, 03:56
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 15:01
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 27.06.2010, 22:27
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Rugxulo, 28.06.2010, 06:30
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 28.06.2010, 12:05
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 28.06.2010, 14:22
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 07:08
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 13:14
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:06
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 01.07.2010, 13:20
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:03
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 19:16
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 03.07.2010, 16:04
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 14.07.2010, 03:51
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 19:16
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:03
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 13:14
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 07:08
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 28.06.2010, 14:22
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 28.06.2010, 12:05
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Rugxulo, 28.06.2010, 06:30
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 27.06.2010, 22:27
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 15:01
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - Rugxulo, 14.03.2010, 03:56
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 22.01.2010, 16:56
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 12:41
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 16:09
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:49
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 16:09
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 14:07
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 15:22
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:30
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 19:32
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 21:56
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 23.07.2010, 07:27
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 01:04
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 15:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 15:36
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 16:23
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 16:57
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 01:35
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Rugxulo, 25.07.2010, 05:34
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 25.07.2010, 06:16
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 17:17
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 26.07.2010, 02:03
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 26.07.2010, 03:11
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 02:53
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 27.07.2010, 03:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 03:40
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 27.07.2010, 03:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 02:53
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 26.07.2010, 03:11
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 26.07.2010, 02:03
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 17:17
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 25.07.2010, 06:16
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Rugxulo, 25.07.2010, 05:34
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 01:35
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 16:57
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 15:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 01:04
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 19:32
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:30
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 15:22
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - Japheth, 22.01.2010, 09:47
Mix view