Re: Announcing a New C++ Zine
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while. This is not the final list. I will soon do a final query of those who want their names to remain on the Editorial Board (and of course, others can be added). The list I sent contains those who have participated in the forming of The C++ Source since last October. You might want to ping him with a private message. I should add here that I forgot to mention in my original post that for now, contributing to The C++ Source is a "labor of love". None of us are getting paid. As we get sufficient advertising, we will share the wealth. We are starting small, but I predict a gradual swelling until this becomes a mainstay for the majority of C++ developers. Someone has suggested a subscription basis, but with today's Internet culture, I think we'll do the most good if we keep it free. That can change, but for now, that's the way it is. After all, Boosters are very familiar with this model :-). -- Chuck Allison
Chuck Allison <chuck@freshsources.com> writes:
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while.
Chuck, if you have *any* clue how to reach him, we'd appreciate knowing how. There are crucial issues related to the licensing and future maintenance of his work that we need to resolve. We can do an end-run around him as a last resort, but it would mean re-creating the threads library from scratch, a nontrivial undertaking. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote: [...]
last resort, but it would mean re-creating the threads library from scratch, a nontrivial undertaking.
Boost.Thread Clean Room Contest. Seriously, you seem to grossly overestimate software copyright protection (especially for thin layers like Boost.Thread taken in isolation). http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise24.html <quote> Elements are filtered out of consideration on the basis of broad criteria, including: - The element's expression was dictated by reasons of efficiency, such as when it is the best way of performing a particular function. - The element's expression was dictated by external factors, such as using an existing file format or interoperating with another program. - The element's expression is a conventional way of writing something in the particular programming language or machine running the program. - The element, at the particular level of abstraction, is an unprotectable process and not protectable expression. - The element is taken from the public domain or is an unprotectable fact. Any protection for elements dictated by efficiency or external factors or processes must come from patents or trade secrets, if at all, and not from copyright. </quote> Hth. regards, alexander.
David Abrahams wrote:
Chuck Allison <chuck@freshsources.com> writes:
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while.
Chuck, if you have *any* clue how to reach him, we'd appreciate knowing how.
Has anyone tried recently?? He still seems to be actively using his cox.net email address. See the Omaha Linux Users Group.. For example here's a post from him dated yesterday: http://lists.olug.org/pipermail/olug/2004-June/013814.html As last resort, his phone number is listed ;-) -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq
Rene Rivera <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Chuck Allison <chuck@freshsources.com> writes:
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while. Chuck, if you have *any* clue how to reach him, we'd appreciate knowing how.
Has anyone tried recently?? He still seems to be actively using his cox.net email address. See the Omaha Linux Users Group.. For example here's a post from him dated yesterday:
I just tried that; we'll see I guess.
As last resort, his phone number is listed ;-)
But I forgot what state he lives in. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
"Rene Rivera" <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> wrote in message news:40CB5904.8090004@redshift-software.com...
David Abrahams wrote:
Chuck Allison <chuck@freshsources.com> writes:
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while.
Chuck, if you have *any* clue how to reach him, we'd appreciate knowing how.
Has anyone tried recently?? He still seems to be actively using his cox.net email address. See the Omaha Linux Users Group.. For example here's a post from him dated yesterday:
I already tried contacting him through his cox.net address and through the Omaha Linux Users Group. I hope you have better luck than I did.
http://lists.olug.org/pipermail/olug/2004-June/013814.html
As last resort, his phone number is listed ;-)
I didn't try this, though. Mike
"Michael Glassford" <glassfordm@hotmail.com> writes:
I already tried contacting him through his cox.net address and through the Omaha Linux Users Group. I hope you have better luck than I did.
Not so far... -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Chuck Allison wrote:
Jeff Flinn wrote:
Has William reappeared?
Actually, I haven't heard from him for a while. This is not the final list. I will soon do a final query of those who want their names to remain on the Editorial Board (and of course, others can be added). The list I sent contains those who have participated in the forming of The C++ Source since last October. You might want to ping him with a private message.
I should add here that I forgot to mention in my original post that for now, contributing to The C++ Source is a "labor of love". None of us are getting paid. As we get sufficient advertising, we will share the wealth. We are starting small, but I predict a gradual swelling until this becomes a mainstay for the majority of C++ developers. Someone has suggested a subscription basis, but with today's Internet culture, I think we'll do the most good if we keep it free. That can change, but for now, that's the way it is. After all, Boosters are very familiar with this model :-).
I suggested a subscription basis, to which I would personally pay in the range $20-40 a year. I would much rather pay for anything than submit to advertising, and all that it entails, in any form. Gee, I am glad every programmer is doing so well under Bush-onomics, that they never need to be paid for what they do. That certainly has not been happening in the area of the US in which I live, but I am willing to believe the rest of the country is much better. I am very appreciative of Boost being free, make no mistake about, and I see great things being done on SourceForge and amidst programming communities contributing free code to others. But I am sure glad myself I am not starting out in the programming world as a young man at this time. I can hardly feed my own face, much less a family, so if I were starting out again I would throw up my hands in despair, or consider life as a monk on Mt. Athos as being just as good a solution <g> . Good luck on your C++ Zine.
"Eddie Diener" <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
Gee, I am glad every programmer is doing so well under Bush-onomics, that they never need to be paid for what they do. That certainly has not been happening in the area of the US in which I live, but I am willing to believe the rest of the country is much better. I am very appreciative of Boost being free, make no mistake about, and I see great things being done on SourceForge and amidst programming communities contributing free code to others. But I am sure glad myself I am not starting out in the programming world as a young man at this time. I can hardly feed my own face, much less a family, so if I were starting out again I would throw up my hands in despair, or consider life as a monk on Mt. Athos as being just as good a solution <g> .
What is the point of this rant? Though I can't figure out what you're talking about, it makes the following sound inauthentic at best:
Good luck on your C++ Zine.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Eddie Diener" <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
Gee, I am glad every programmer is doing so well under Bush-onomics, that they never need to be paid for what they do. That certainly has not been happening in the area of the US in which I live, but I am willing to believe the rest of the country is much better. I am very appreciative of Boost being free, make no mistake about, and I see great things being done on SourceForge and amidst programming communities contributing free code to others. But I am sure glad myself I am not starting out in the programming world as a young man at this time. I can hardly feed my own face, much less a family, so if I were starting out again I would throw up my hands in despair, or consider life as a monk on Mt. Athos as being just as good a solution <g> .
What is the point of this rant? Though I can't figure out what you're talking about, it makes the following sound inauthentic at best:
Here is my advice to you. Get a life, lighten up a little, permit yourself to take seriously something outside of your own thinking about programming. Even on the Boost NGs there is room for that. And finally stop trying to read into remarks that I make some sort of evil intent. I have only the best admiration and wishes for the programmers at Boost. But I speak my mind and will continue to do that as long as I live no matter how popular or unpopular are my understanings or opinions.
Good luck on your C++ Zine.
"Eddie Diener" <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
What is the point of this rant? Though I can't figure out what you're talking about, it makes the following sound inauthentic at best:
Here is my advice to you.
I didn't ask for advice. I just wanted to know what you meant by that paragraph, because I couldn't understand it. About all it communicated to me was a sense of sarcasm and vitriol, with no discernable content.
Get a life,
Whatever that means
lighten up a little, permit yourself to take seriously something outside of your own thinking about programming.
Very strange; you want me to lighten up and yet take something new seriously? That sounds self-contradictory. And besides, I make it a cardinal rule never to think about anything other than programming. My wife wouldn't stand for it... ...<wink>
Even on the Boost NGs there is room for that.
I'll just note the facts: the Boost NGs have rules against off-topic posts, third-party attacks, and flame wars. Your last two posts seem to be straying dangerously into all of those waters.
And finally stop trying to read into remarks that I make some sort of evil intent.
I didn't think you had an evil intent, but I thought you should know that after so much apparent vitriol and sarcasm, "good luck" is likely to be misinterpreted.
I have only the best admiration and wishes for the programmers at Boost. But I speak my mind and will continue to do that as long as I live no matter how popular or unpopular are my understanings or opinions.
That's up to you. I am sure you'll understand then, that the moderators of this group will continue to moderate it, and will continue to do that as long as they are moderators or until the policy changes, no matter how popular or unpopular that may be with those subject to moderation. I'd really prefer it if we moderators didn't have to try to figure out how to deal with a "problem poster", though, especially right now. It happens to be an especially bad time for many of us. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Eddie Diener" <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
What is the point of this rant?
He doesn't like the {GNU} idea to make software "public goods". http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=403344E5.E7872D34%40web.de [... continue to moderate ...] It's kind of funny when you try to "moderate" (in public) the discussion you participate in yourself. regards, alexander.
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Eddie Diener" <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
What is the point of this rant?
He doesn't like the {GNU} idea to make software "public goods".
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=403344E5.E7872D34%40web.de
Actually I like the idea that people should get paid for their efforts, while at the same time I do very much appreciate the efforts of those who don't get paid such as the Boost developers in putting out free software. My suggestion for a subscription to the C++ Zine was to help those who were willing to put out the effort of writing articles, and developing software based on them, to get paid.
participants (7)
-
Alexander Terekhov -
Chuck Allison -
David Abrahams -
Eddie Diener -
Edward Diener
-
Michael Glassford -
Rene Rivera