Re: Error Occurs: Replace a character in a String

On Apr 11, 12:01 am, Jimbo wrote: > Hello, I am getting an error in my python script when I try to change > a character in a string. [b]But I dont know why or what to do to fix > it?[/b] > > I have commented in my code where the error occurs > > [code] > def format_file(filename): > >     HTML_fil

Re: SEC proposes the use of Python and XML

On Apr 10, 11:13 pm, Ted Larson Freeman wrote: > This week the SEC proposed new requirements for asset-backed > securities that include the use of XML and Python: > > "The asset-level information would be provided according to proposed > standards and in a tagged data format using eXtensible Marku

Re: Python and Regular Expressions

On Apr 10, 1:05 pm, Stefan Behnel wrote: > Running a Python program in CPython eventually boils down to a sequence of > commands being executed by the CPU. That doesn't mean you should write > those commands manually, even if you can. It's perfectly ok to write the > program in Python instead. A

Re: SEC proposes the use of Python and XML

On Apr 11, 3:12 am, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 10Apr2010 23:05, Chris Rebert wrote: > | On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Ted Larson Freeman| > wrote: > > | > This week the SEC proposed new requirements for asset-backed > | > securities that include the use of XML and Python: > | > > | > "The a

Re: Extracting an undefined number of items from a list

On Apr 12, 3:05 pm, vsoler wrote: > Hi everyone, > > say that 'db' is a list of values > say 'i' is a list of indexes > I'd like to get a list where each item is i-th element of db. > > For example: > > db=[10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90]      #undefined length > i=[3,5,7]                            

Re: Extracting an undefined number of items from a list

On Apr 12, 9:26 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > # The obfuscated, fragile way > map( itemgetter(0), sorted( >      zip(db, range(1, len(db)+1)), key=lambda t: t[1] if t[1] in i else -1 >      )[-len(i):] ) I have to hand it to you that this might, in fact, be "the" obfuscated, fragile way, but I go

Re: pyjamas 0.7 released

On Apr 25, 8:49 am, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > pyjamas - the stand-alone python-to-javascript compiler, and separate > GUI Widget Toolkit, has its 0.7 release, today.  this has been much > delayed, in order to allow the community plenty of time between the > 0.7pre2 release and the fina

Re: Confusing SyntaxError while entering non-indented code in interactive interpreter on continuation line.

On Apr 25, 3:31 pm, Colin Howell wrote: > [I originally sent this to python-help; the volunteer who responded > thought it was OK to repost it here.] > > I'm sure this has been discussed somewhere before, but I can't find it > in the Python issue tracker. The following behavior from the > interact

Re: Threading problem

On Apr 25, 2:55 pm, sdistefano wrote: > I have the following issue: > > My program runs a thread called the MainThread, that loops trough a > number of URLs and decides when it's the right time for one to be > fetched.  Once a URL has to be fetched, it's added to a Queue object, > where the Fetchi

Re: pyjamas 0.7 released

On Apr 26, 8:44 am, lkcl wrote: >  the purpose of browsers is to isolate the application, restrict its > access to the rest of the desktop and OS, so that random applications > cannot go digging around on your private data. Well, I would agree that a "requirement" for the browser is to help insu

Re: Completely Deleting A Directory

On Apr 26, 4:09 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > It doesn’t seem to mention in the documentation for os.walk > that symlinks to directories are > returned in the list of directories, not the list of files. This will lead > to an error in the os.rmdir call i

Re: pyjamas 0.7 released

On Apr 26, 4:12 pm, lkcl wrote: >  and, given that you can use AJAX (e.g. JSONRPC) to communicate with a > server-side component, installed on 127.0.0.1 and effectively do the > exact same thing, nobody bothers. I suppose, but again, that pushes off the security thing. There are a lot of obviou

Re: Python dot-equals (syntax proposal)

On Apr 30, 11:04 am, Jabapyth wrote: > At least a few times a day I wish python had the following shortcut > syntax: > > vbl.=func(args) > > this would be equivalent to > > vbl = vbl.func(args) > > example: > > foo = "Hello world" > foo.=split(" ") > print foo > # ['Hello', 'world'] > > and I gues

Re: Python dot-equals (syntax proposal)

On May 1, 7:13 am, Tim Chase wrote: > On 05/01/2010 12:08 AM, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > +=, -=, /=, *=, etc.  conceptually (and, if lhs object supports in- > > place operator methods, actually) *modify* the lhs object. > > > Your proposed .= syntax conceptuall

Re: Python dot-equals (syntax proposal)

On May 1, 9:03 pm, Chris Rebert wrote: > In both cases, __iOP__ operator methods are being used, not vanilla > __OP__ methods, so neither of your examples are relevant to Mr. > Chase's point. Well, Tim's main assertion was: "The += family of operators really do rebind the symbol, not modify the o

Re: condition and True or False

On May 2, 12:14 pm, Paul McGuire wrote: > While sifting through some code looking for old "x and y or z" code > that might better be coded using "y if x else z", I came across this > puzzler: > >     x = and True or False > > What is "and True or False" adding to this picture?  The boolean > expr

Re: Django as exemplary design

On May 4, 5:34 pm, TomF wrote: > On 2010-05-04 07:11:08 -0700, alex23 said: > > (I also think there's value to be gained in studying _bad_ code, > > too...) > > True, although whether that's time well spent is another question. I don't know how this applies to reading other peoples' code, but rec

Re: Picking a license

On May 6, 6:56 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > [email protected] (Aahz) writes: > > In article <[email protected]>, > > Rouslan Korneychuk   wrote: > > > >The only question I have now is what about licensing? Is that > > >something I need to worry about? Should I go with LGPL, MIT, or > > >somet

Re: fast regex

On May 6, 9:44 pm, james_027 wrote: > On May 6, 11:33 pm, John Bokma wrote: > > > james_027 writes: > > > I was working with regex on a very large text, really large but I have > > > time constrained. Does python has any other regex library or string > > > manipulation library that works really

Re: Picking a license

On May 7, 5:33 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > Patrick Maupin writes: > > On May 6, 6:56 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > > > Er, no. Anyone who thinks that a copyleft license “forces” anyone to > > > do anything is mistaken about copyright law > > > Perhaps you feel "

Re: Picking a license

On May 7, 6:44 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > Patrick Maupin writes: > > On May 7, 5:33 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > > > Since no-one is forcing anyone to take any of the actions permitted > > > in the license, and since those actions would not otherwise be > > > perm

Re: Picking a license

On May 8, 3:37 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 07 May 2010 23:40:22 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > Personally, I believe that if anything is false and misleading, it is > > the attempt to try to completely change the discussion from MIT vs. GPL > > to GPL vs. no

Re: Fastest way to calculate leading whitespace

On May 8, 12:19 pm, dasacc22 wrote: > Hi > > This is a simple question. I'm looking for the fastest way to > calculate the leading whitespace (as a string, ie '    '). > > Here are some different methods I have tried so far > --- solution 1 > > a = '    some content\n' > b = a.strip() > c = ' '*(l

Re: Picking a license

On May 8, 2:38 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > I don't think you understand what a moral hazard is. Under no > circumstances is it a moral hazard to say "If you do X, I will do Y" -- > in this case, "If you obey these restrictions on redistribution, I'll > licence this copyrighted work to you". Pe

Re: Fastest way to calculate leading whitespace

On May 8, 1:16 pm, dasacc22 wrote: > On May 8, 12:59 pm, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > On May 8, 12:19 pm, dasacc22 wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > This is a simple question. I'm looking for the fastest way to > > > calculate the leading wh

Re: Picking a license

On May 8, 8:41 pm, Ben Finney wrote: > Patrick Maupin writes: > > On May 8, 2:38 pm, Steven D'Aprano > cybersource.com.au> wrote: > > > Which brings us back full circle to Ben's position, which you took > > > exception to. > > […] > > >

Re: Picking a license

On May 8, 11:29 pm, Paul Rubin wrote: > No it doesn't (not like the above).  You, the licensee under the GPL, > can make those combinations and use them as much as you want on your own > computers.  You just can't distribute the resulting derivative to other > people.  With proprietary software y

Re: Picking a license

On May 8, 11:36 pm, Paul Rubin wrote: > [email protected] (Aahz) writes: > > What does your argument claim about Apache? > > No idea.  I don't have the impression the developer communities are > really similar, and Apache httpd doesn't have all that many developers > compared with something lik

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 12:19 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 08 May 2010 16:39:33 -0700, Carl Banks wrote: > > GPL is about fighting a holy war against commercial software. > > Much GPL software *is* commercial software. Given that you're so badly > misinformed about the GPL that you think it can't be com

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 1:03 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 08 May 2010 13:05:21 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > [...] > > > certainly the > > risk of discovery if you just use a small portion of GPL code and don't > > distribute your source must be very small.

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 1:02 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 8 Mai, 22:05, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 8, 2:38 pm, Steven D'Aprano > > > No, you don't *owe* them anything, but this brings us back to Ben's > > > original post. If you care about the freedoms o

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 1:42 am, Paul Rubin wrote: > Patrick Maupin writes: > > I certainly agree that RMS's language is couched in religious rhetoric. > > I would say political movement rhetoric.  He's not religious.  He uses > the word "spiritual" sometimes but has mad

Re: Picking a license (an atempt to give real advice)

On May 9, 8:58 am, Ed Keith wrote: > Stepping back from the political/philosophical/religious arguments, I'd like > to give some real advice based on my own perspective. > > How you license your software should be based on how you want it to be used. > > If you are releasing an end user applicati

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 12:08 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 9 Mai, 09:05, Carl Banks wrote: > > > > > Bottom line is, GPL hurts everyone: the companies and open source > > community.  Unless you're one of a handful of projects with sufficient > > leverage, or are indeed a petty jealous person fighting a holy war

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 4:21 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: (Lots of good and balanced commentary snipped...) > I didn't say that you personally argued that way, but people do argue > that way. In fact, it's understandable that this is how some people > attempt to understand the GPL - the software maintains a particu

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 6:39 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 10 Mai, 00:02, Patrick Maupin wrote: > If this is code that you would consider using in an existing project, Well, in a few cases I'm talking about, I wouldn't consider using the code -- I just stumbled across it when researching

Re: Picking a license

On May 9, 5:05 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 9 Mai, 21:55, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 9, 12:08 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > > Oh sure: the GPL hurts everyone, like all the companies who have made > > > quite a lot of money out of effectively making Linux t

Re: Picking a license

On May 10, 6:01 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 10 Mai, 03:09, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 9, 6:39 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > but if they aren't pitching it directly at you, why would you believe > > > that they are trying to change your behavi

Re: Picking a license

On May 10, 12:37 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 10 Mai, 17:06, [email protected] (Aahz) wrote: > > > In article > > <074b412a-c2f4-4090-a52c-4d69edb29...@d39g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > Paul Boddie   wrote: > > >Actually, the copyleft licences don't "force" anyone to "give back > > >changes":

Re: Picking a license

On May 11, 5:24 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 10 Mai, 17:01, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > I'll be charitable and assume the fact that you can make that > > statement without apparent guile merely means that you haven't read > > the post I was referring to: > >

Re: Picking a license

On May 11, 5:34 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 10 Mai, 20:36, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > I've addressed this before.  Aahz used a word in an accurate, but to > > you, inflammatory, sense, but it's still accurate -- the man *would* > > force you to pay for the chocola

Re: Picking a license

On May 11, 9:00 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 11 Mai, 15:00, Lie Ryan wrote: > > Come on, 99%  of the projects released under GPL did so because they > > don't want to learn much about the law; they just need to release it > > under a certain license so their users have some legal certainty. > > Ye

Re: Picking a license

On May 11, 6:18 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Last time I came home with chocolate, I tried that excuse on my wife. She > didn't believe it for a second. > > Next time, I'll try claiming that I was obliged to eat the chocolate > because of the GPL. Good luck with that. Women can always see right

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 7:10 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 11 Mai, 22:39, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > OK.  Now I'm REALLY confused.  I said "Certainly RMS > > carefully lays out that the LGPL should be used sparingly in his "Why > > you shouldn't use

Re: Picking a license

On May 11, 10:06 pm, Lie Ryan wrote: > The point is, GPL (and OWL) is for programmers who just don't care about > the legal stuffs and would want to spend more time writing code than > writing license. Absolutely. When I wrote "permissive license" I was not trying to imply that everybody should

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 7:26 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 11 Mai, 23:02, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > Huh? Permissive licenses offer much better certainty for someone > > attempting a creative mash-up.  Different versions of the Apache > > license don't conflict with each other.

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 7:43 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 11 Mai, 22:50, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 11, 5:34 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > > Yes, *if* you took it. He isn't forcing you to take it, though, is he? > > > No,  but he said a lot of words that I didn&#

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 2:19 am, Lie Ryan wrote: > On 05/12/10 06:50, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > On May 11, 5:34 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > >> On 10 Mai, 20:36, Patrick Maupin wrote: > >>>  The fact is, I know the man would force me to pay for the chocolate, so >

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 12:17 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 12 Mai, 16:45, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 12, 7:43 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > Thus, "owned my soul" joins "holy war" and "Bin Laden" on the list. > > > That rhetorical toolbox i

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 1:00 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 12 Mai, 16:10, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 12, 7:10 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > What the licence asks you to do and what the author of the licence > > > wants you to do are two separate things. > > > B

Re: Limitation of os.walk

On May 12, 2:04 pm, kj wrote: > It seems that a similar "simplicity argument" was invoked > to strip the cmp option from sort in Python 3.  G.  Simplicity > is great, but when the drive for it starts causing useful functionality > to be thrown out, then it is going too far.  Yes, I know that i

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 5:41 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > > Ahh, well done.  You've sucked me into a meaningless side debate.  If > > I'm not distributing readline, then legally the license distribution > > terms don't apply to me.  End of story.  (Morally, now we might get > > into how trivial it is or isn't.) >

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 6:15 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 12 Mai, 20:29, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > But nobody's whining about the strings attached to the software.  Just > > pointing out why they sometimes won't use a particular piece of > > software, and pointing

Re: Picking a license

On May 12, 10:48 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Ed Keith > wrote: > > > ... but to claim that putting more restrictions on someone give them more > > freedom is pure Orwellian double speak. > > What about the freedom to take away other people’s freedom? The freedom to take away oth

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 2:58 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 12 May 2010 22:16:29 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > On May 12, 10:48 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > central.gen.new_zealand> wrote: > >> In message , Ed > >> Keith wrote: > > >> > ... b

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 7:25 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message > <155f1683-9bfd-4a83-b63f-7fb0fc2f5...@g21g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>, Patrick > > Maupin wrote: > > On May 12, 10:48 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > wrote: > > >> In message , Ed >

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 9:53 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 13 Mai, 01:36, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > Once the court reaches that conclusion, it would only be a tiny step > > to find that the FSF's attempt to claim that clisp infringes the > > readline copyright t

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 11:19 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > People only have to honour requests for the corresponding source if > asked for it. They are not violating copyright by default. Well, the gospel according to the FSF says otherwise: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnchangedJustBinary > If you

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 6:30 pm, Brendan Abel <[email protected]> wrote: > While I think most of the disagreement in this long thread results > from different beliefs in what "freedom" means, I wanted to add, that > most of the responses that argue that the MIT license permits the user > more freedom than th

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 6:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 13 May 2010 08:06:52 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > If I download an Ubuntu > > ISO, burn it and give it away (let's say I give away 100 copies, just to > > remove the fair use defense), then I have violated t

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 6:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 13 May 2010 08:06:52 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: [...] > >> Only a > >> tiny proportion of people would discover by their own efforts that the > >> source code was available > > > No, I tell my fr

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 6:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 13 May 2010 08:06:52 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > Perhaps the Apache model doesn't work quite as well as you think? Apparently it's 66 percent of the web servers for the million busiest sites, and presumably 65 for

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 10:07 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > How exactly does the LGPL lead to a requirement to “relink”? I think this might be a misconception, but I'm not 100% sure. Since Ed gives his customers full source code, there may not be the requirement to directly provide the ability to relink,

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 10:03 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <72888d2c-4b1a-4b08-a3aa- > > [email protected]>, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > If I download an Ubuntu ISO, burn it and give it away (let's say I give > > away 100 copies, just to

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 10:04 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Ed Keith > wrote: > > > The claim is being made that [the GPL] restricts freedom. > > What about the “freedom” to restrict other people’s freedom? Should that be > restricted or not? It's interesting that some people don't like the co

Re: Picking a license

On May 13, 10:06 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Ed Keith > wrote: > > > > > Assertion I: > >    If person A is free to do more than person B, then person A has > >    more freedom then person B. > > > Assertion II: > >    If person A is free do perform an action person B is not free

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 8:47 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 05:35, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > I mean, it's in English and very technically precise, but if you > > follow all the references, you quickly come to realize that the > > license is a "patch&qu

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:10 am, Ed Keith wrote: > --- On Thu, 5/13/10, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > From: Patrick Maupin > > Subject: Re: Picking a license > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Thursday, May 13, 2010, 11:35 PM > > On

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 1:08 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 13 May 2010 19:10:09 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > The broken window fallacy is about labor that could have been spent > > elsewhere if someone else had done something differently.  The only time > > that comes i

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 8:26 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 13 Mai, 22:10, Patrick Maupin wrote: > Just to deal with your Ubuntu "high horse" situation first, you should > take a look at the following for what people regard to be the best > practices around GPL-licensed software

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 6:12 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <2ff3643b-6ef1-4471-8438- > > > > [email protected]>, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > On May 13, 10:04 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > wrote: > > >> In message , Ed

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 6:13 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message > <2b17ee77-0e49-4a97-994c-7582f86c0...@r34g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, Patrick > > Maupin wrote: > > On May 13, 10:06 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > wrote: > > >> Under the GPL, e

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 10:20 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 09:08, Carl Banks wrote: > > > On May 13, 10:59 pm, Steven D'Aprano > > wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 May 2010 17:18:47 -0700, Carl Banks wrote: > > > > 2. Reimplment the functionality seperately (*cough* PySide) > > > > Yes. So what? In what possi

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 11:48 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 17:37, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > Before, you were busy pointing me at the GPL FAQ as authoritative. > > No, the licence is the authority, although the FAQ would probably be > useful to clarify the licence auth

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 1:07 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 19:00, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > Would you have agreed had he had said that "MatLab's license doesn't > > do much good" and assigned the same sort of meaning to that statement, > > namely that the

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 1:38 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 19:15, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > On May 14, 11:48 am, Paul Boddie wrote: > > > Section 3 of GPLv2 (and section 6(d) of GPLv3 reads similarly): "If > > > distribution of executable or object code is made by

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 2:26 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 20:36, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > > > That statement was made in the context of why Carl doesn't use GPL- > > licensed *libraries*.  He and I have both explained the difference > > between libraries and pr

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 6:42 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > > You really should slow down and read a bit more carefully. > > You might want to tone down the condescension. I didn't start out condescending, and I agree I could have worded this particular statement a bit more clearly, so I apologize for that, but I

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 7:24 pm, Terry Reedy wrote: > > "The option to provide an offer for source rather than direct source > distribution is a special benefit to companies equipped to handle a > fulfillment process. GPLv2 § 3(c) and GPLv3 § 6(c) avoid burdening > noncommercial, occasional redistributors with

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 6:52 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: > On 14 Mai, 21:14, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > > If Joe downloads and burns a CD for his friend, he may not have the > > sources and may not have any intention of getting them, and probably > > didn't provide a "written offe

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:02 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message > , Patrick > > > > Maupin wrote: > > On May 14, 6:12 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > wrote: > > >> In message > >> <[email protected]

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:04 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <548024fc- > [email protected]>, Patrick Maupin > wrote: > > > The confusion that some are showing in this thread about whether source > > must be distributed c

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 8:57 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <84a26d03-03b3-47d9- > > [email protected]>, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > I also firmly believe, as I have stated before, that the GPL is a much > > more commercial license

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:21 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Ed Keith > wrote: > > > I just refuse to use [the GPL] in any code for a client, because I > > do not want to require someone who does not know source code from Morse > > code code to figure out what they need to do to avoid violating t

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:32 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > Don't be silly.  That's why I started writing open source software in > > the first place.  But if I start writing stuff to put in the commons > > with strings removed, why would I bother with a license that just adds > > some strings back? > > To max

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 8:58 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Ed Keith > wrote: > > > Yes, under the GPL every one has one set of freedoms, under the MIT or > > Boost license every one has more freedoms. Under other licenses they have > > fewer freedoms. > > But what about the “freedom” to take aw

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:17 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message > , Patrick > > Maupin wrote: > > After all, lots of software ideas proved their worth in proprietary > > systems, and then were later cloned by FOSS developers. > > And vice versa. Everybody

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 9:59 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > I think this talk about freedoms is dangerously incomplete, and is > confusing the issue rather than shedding more light. Both licences grant > the same positive freedoms (freedom to do something). MIT-style licences > grant permission to: > > * make co

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 11:19 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:10:50 -0700, Ed Keith wrote: > > But if my client give someone else a copy of the binary I gave them, > > they are now in violation. I do not want to put my client in this > > position. > > If your client is distributing software

Re: Picking a license

On May 15, 12:50 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 08:37:14 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > The most obvious example was that the University of Berkley counter-sued > Unix System Laboratories over USL's infringement of the BSD licence. Well, I specifically ex

Re: Picking a license

On May 15, 1:34 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 19:17:20 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote: > > On May 14, 9:04 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > central.gen.new_zealand> wrote: > >> In message <548024fc- > >> dd56-48b9-907d-3aa6a722b...@l31g

Re: Picking a license

On May 14, 8:04 am, Ethan Furman wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> You've never had to recode something because it was nominally available >> under a proprietary licence that you (or your client) was unwilling to >> use? Lucky you! > Steven, did you actually read what he wrote?  If you did, why

Re: Picking a license

On May 15, 12:49 pm, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article > <7bdce8a7-bf7d-4f1f-bc9d-1eca26974...@d27g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, > Patrick Maupin   wrote: > > > >That is correct.  All "privileges" as you put it are merely things > >that a user can

Re: Picking a license

On May 15, 2:59 pm, Paul Boddie wrote: [Rest of the post, that contains points previously debated and well- refuted, snipped] > Any claim that a licensing change is needed merely to let people > develop open source applications on the platform is dishonest, See, there you go again, impugning th

Re: write a 20GB file

On May 15, 7:09 pm, Dave Angel wrote: > Nathan Rice wrote: > > This is precisely the situation mmap was made for :)  It has almost the same > > methods as a file so it should be an easy replacement. > > > > > Only on a 64bit system, and I'm not sure it's even possible there in > every case.  On a

Re: write a 20GB file

On May 15, 7:09 pm, Dave Angel wrote: > Nathan Rice wrote: > > This is precisely the situation mmap was made for :)  It has almost the same > > methods as a file so it should be an easy replacement. > > > > > Only on a 64bit system, and I'm not sure it's even possible there in > every case.  On a

Re: Picking a license

On May 16, 9:19 am, Ed Keith wrote: > --- On Sat, 5/15/10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > wrote: > > >> But what about the “freedom” to take away > > other > > >> people’s freedom? Is that really “freedom”? > > > > Yes. > > > But that’s a “freedom” that non-GPL licences do not > > give you, that the GPL

Re: imports and exec

On May 16, 1:51 pm, Paul Carter wrote: > We are using python for our build system. Each subproject dir has a > python script that builds it. Parent dirs have python scripts that > recurse into their children and use exec to invoke the python scripts. > Recently we discovered that one of the python

Re: global variables in imported modules

On May 16, 4:42 pm, vsoler wrote: > Taken fromwww.python.org, FAQ 2.3 How do I share global variables > across modules? > > config.py: > > x = 0   # Default value of the 'x' configuration setting > > mod.py: > > import config > config.x = 1 > > main.py: > > import config       # try removing it >

Re: global variables in imported modules

On May 16, 5:38 pm, James Mills wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:26 AM, vsoler wrote: > > However, can I be 100% sure that,no matter how I access variable > > 'x' (with config.x or mod.config.x) it is always the same 'x'. I mean > > that either reference of 'x' points to the same id(memory posi

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >