RE: RC197 online

For feature requests and bug reports RC15 RC16. Please use the forum at http://forum.ultravnc.net/

Go code it yourself and quit being such a baby in public. Do you really
think you are going to find support here on what UltraVNC does and doesn't
have to provide you under GPL, and what you think  UltraVNC should and
shouldn't do with their web site and blah blah blah.

Code it yourself, sounds like you will be much happier and it will let the
rest of us get back to solving UltraVNC issues, not GPL issues.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Philip White
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 10:27 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ultravnc-list] RC197 online

For feature requests and bug reports RC15 RC16. Please use the forum at
http://forum.ultravnc.net/

Hi Rudi,

Thanks for your reply.  It seems that we do have different views on
the interpretation of the GPL.  I'm not going to keep on pursuing
this, as ultimately there I cannot see what can be gained by annoying
the UltraVNC team.  I am sorry that I have felt compelled to push - I
really don't want to piss you or anyone off (but probably already have
done so).

However, I do think the list, and anyone interested in UltraVNC, who
may want to adopt and extend it themselves, ought to know what I have
now learnt (from our discussion below) about the certain aspects of
the project relating to licensing and source code availability.

Forgive me if I summarise this incorrectly:

- The repeater.exe currently in RC197 is not GPL licensed as of yet. 
However the you have said it will be at some time in the future.

- You claim the repeater.exe in RC197 is not a derivative work of
other GPL'ed code (for instance the GPL'ed code for the a repeater in
CVS).

- Despite that the repeater in RC197 (and some earlier releases) is
included in a package of software that has a GPL-click through
license, and contains the GPL license.txt, with no stated GPL
exceptions, you state that its not to be consided GPL'd code.

- The SC UltraVNC variant is GPL'ed, but source code is not available
right now, even though from the forums it appears it has been around
since before december 04.  The UltraVNC team will release the source
'within a reasonable time' - but there is no available date by when
this will be done.

- The GPL'ed SC UltraVNC variant is still available for download from
the Ultravnc site as a binary only, despite the fact the team know
that the source code for it doesn't really exist any more.

My reasons for wanting the source quickly aren't really relevant to
whether I am allowed to asked for it under the GPL  but they are no
big secret:  I need to use something similar to Ultravnc SC in a small
project of my own.  Before I  found UltraVNC SC I was on the verge of
modifying standard winvnc myself - but found the much better UltraVNC,
that did much of what I want - but not all.  I thought "Great, based
on GPL - I can use it modify it just as I was going to do with
standard VNC - But let's get the source just so I know that (a) I can
make the changes I need to, and (b) that I won't be vulnerable to
protocol feature changes, or bugs I can't fix,  in the future that
could scupper things if I only have out-date binaries to rely on. "  
I will make sure that if I distribute any modifications to VNC or
other GPL'ed code, that I have the source ready share with those who
are entitled to it - before I actually release it.

Sadly, I have achieved nothing more than probably pushing and
irriating a developer of a project that I think has done some really
fantastic work.

As a result of this  I cannot continue to use UltraVNC as the basis
for my project in the way that I'd hoped to, because the source code
availability is not complete.  I look forward with hope that the
situation will change in the future.

I do think it would have saved me a lot of time if the lack of
existance of source for UltraVNC SC had been clearly indicated on the
UltraVNC website.  In addition I think it is also necessary for the
UltraVNC team to make clear to everyone what is, and is not covered by
the GPL in their binary releases.  If this is too difficult to do,
then ultravnc binaries that are GPL but for which there continues to
be no full source code available should be removed from the website,
along with those that are not GPLed at all, until the situation can be
clarified.

Once again.  I think the UltraVNC team has done some great work.   I
wish it all the best..  But here is where I sign off, and say Goodbye
for now.

Phil

PS People who have read this far, can follow the full off-list
exchange of views below.

> 
> You are correct about UltraVNC and SC. 
> Code is 100% GPL and we will provide the source code. 
> Only for the SC code you need to wait, current code can not be used. 
> There is no single cpp file without a compiler error, some removed parts
> where added 
> back even as sample will it not be usefull. 
> We only need to provide the code within a reasonable time. 
> 
> A license is something from the developper to the user and 
> does not bind the developper to anything. 
> It is not because the repeater V1 had a GPL header V1.02 still 
> have the same.... and based on does not make it automatic GPL. 
> Compare 
> http://www.taiyo.co.jp/~gotoh/ssh/connect.c 
>
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/ultravnc/ultravnc/repeater/repeater.c?
rev=1.1&view=markup
> Reusing a function does not make it a derivate work, i only found it a
> proper way to mention connect.c 
> 
> It is not because you add a dll or exe in the installer it is also GPL. 
> The exe need to be linked to the GPL code or make use of it. 
> Driver Nat2nat repeater does not make use of vnc, but vnc make use of
them. 
> 
> Rep V1.02 will also be released as GPL, because we want it that way, not
> because we have to. 
> Big difference... 
> 
> I don't like being pushed but perhaps you have good reasons 
> that you need the code that fast. 
> I don't think it have to do anything with GPL :) 
> 
> Greetings 
> rudi 
>   
 
 
> 
> Philip White schreef: 
> Hi Rudi, 
> 
> Thanks for the quick reply.  I think I understand the situation 
> better.  The last thing I wanted to be was a nag to the UltraVNC team 
> when there is so much great work being done, and contributed freely to 
> the community. 
> 
> The reality, as I understand it, is that there are binaries being 
> distriuted from the UltraVNC websites that are based on GPL code, for 
> which there is no source available at the current time.  I realise 
> that when RC19 is considered stable, then all the source will be in a 
> tidier state and all will be available as a source tarball or via CVS. 
>  I can understand your reasons for wanting to do it that way. 
> 
> However, as harsh as it may seem, once a developer distributes a 
> binary under the GPL the decision to defer making source code 
> available (to those those who have recieved the binary distribution) 
> is no longer his (or hers) to make.  Of course, that may mean that the 
> developer is asked to share code that he (or she) knows is perhaps 
> buggy or unfinished from their own point of view. - that is not what 
> is relevant as far as the GPL is concerned. 
> 
> Is the repeater in RC197 intended to be 'commercial' as opposed to GPL 
> licensed?   If so it probably should never have been included in the 
> installer that had a click-through GPL license.  Once distributed as 
> GPL the option to provide source to those who've received it cannot be 
> revoked.  Given its similarity to the the CVS repeater, I'd be hard 
> for anyone to be convinced that it  isn't in someway based on GPL code 
> (originating from Shun-ichi Goto's original connect.c) , so therefore 
> must inherit the GPL itself. 
> 
> I do not ignore pressures of time that you, and other Ultravnc 
> contributors face - the Uvnc team is doing a fantastic project. 
> However, I am formally asking, as I am allowed to under the GPL, for 
> the source to all the code that distributed in binary format for the 
> repeater V1.02, and also the SC Ultravnc version that is distributed 
> from the uvnc.net's SC Creator - 
> http://www.uvnc.net/index.php?section=19) .  I understand that this 
> may involve a different source tree, that may not be up to date with 
> all the very latest fixes. 
> 
> Thanks very much, 
> 
> Phil 
> 
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 16:53:22 +0100, [email protected] 
> <[email protected]> wrote: 
> >  Cvs contain the latest Ultravnc code. 
> > 
> >  Repeater v1.02 is not in the tree. 
> >  SC is not in the tree 
> > 
> >  SC was in a seperate code tree, but merging it with cvs has total
broken 
> > everything. 
> >  SINGLECLICKULTRA was a lan distribution test, not the SC. 
> >  To prepare the code, SINGLECLICKULTRA defines are removed, they are
> partly 
> > the same 
> >  as SC. 
> >  I need to manual extract all bits and add it to the cvs to prevent me
> from 
> > having the same prob again.  Doing it before RC19 is stable is to
> dangerous, 
> > you don't know if bugs are from 
> >  RC19 or SC changes.  I'm spending all my free time on debugging current

> > RC19... 
> >  Need time... 
> > 
> >  After i found a (changed) repeater commercial, i didn't do any updates
in
> > the cvs. 
> >  Still need to decided if i will put it there or not. 
> > 
> > 
> >  ________________________________ 
> >  Hi Rudi,Thanks for that tip. I checked out the latest from CVS
directly, 
> > andstill am not able, for example, to find the source for V1.02 of 
> > therepeater, the binary of which is in RC197. There is an much
> olderversion 
> > in CVS.It would be so grateful if you could point to to where I can get
> the 
> > latest.Also, do you know if there's any particular reason why 
> > theSINGLECLICKULTRA defines have been removed. Also I notice in
> RC195there's 
> > a comment in winvnc.cpp that says "default command line to bepatched
after
> > compilation" - yet I can't see how that equates to theway that the
uvncsc 
> > exe takes it's parameters from helpdesk.txt whichis embedded in the 
> > self-extracting single click exe.I wondering again if I've not got the
> right 
> > source - it looksincreasingly like I don't. Can you let me know where or
> how 
> > I can getall the missing bits.Many thanks,PhilOn Thu, 03 Mar 2005
12:08:37
> > +0100, [email protected] wrote:> Cvs was updated yesterday to
current 
> > RC197.> W! ebcvs is not up to date (other server,usual it take a few
> days), 
> > but using> wincvs you can download the correct source.> > 
> > ________________________________> > For feature requests and bug reports

> > RC15 RC16. Please use the forum at> http://forum.ultravnc.net/
> >  Hi  Rudi,Thanks 
> > very much - looks like some> excellent improvements / fixes.Could you
> please 
> > post the corresponding> source too, or alternativelyadvise me on how or 
> > where to get it, according> to GPL-based provisions? Sourceforge CVS / 
> > downloadable source archives are> a bit out ofdate or are 
> > incomplete.Thanks,

> > PhilOn Thu, 03 Mar 2005 02:23:32> +0100, De Vos Rudi 
> > wrote:> For feature requests and bug reports RC15 RC16.> Please use the 
> > forum at http://forum.ultravnc.net/> > Some major FT and> registry bug 
> > fixes.> > The version with seperated admin probs had a stupid> error.>
> Save 
> > HKCU, view and load HKLM........uuups> This had strange> effects...> > 
> > FileTransfer F! ixes> > For all changes please reffer to the>
whatnew.txt
> in 
> > the zip> > DOWNLOAD> http://www.uvnc.com/RC197/RC197_Latest>> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------> SF email is> 
> > sponsored by - The IT Product Guide> Read honest & candid reviews on> 
> > hundreds of IT Products from real users.> Discover which products truly 
> > live> up to the hype. Start reading now.>> 
> >
>
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click>--------------------
-----------------------------------SF>
> > email is sponsored by - The IT Product GuideRead honest & candid reviews
> on> 
> > hundreds of IT Products from real users.Discover which products truly
> live> 
> > up to the hype. Start reading> 
> > now.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click> > > > > > 
> >


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click




-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click