These are chat archives for AvaloniaUI/Avalonia

25th
Feb 2015
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 07:13
Why couldn't you use it?
In Perspex, I mean
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 07:28
It's compatible with GPL (Perspex is MIT)
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 10:00
ok, i'm not an expert on these things, but GPL is more restrictive than MIT and could cause problems for people wanting to use Perspex commercially
If you do distribute YOUR APPLICATION, and you used something GPL as part of your application (even if only linking at run-time to a library) - and even if you do not charge money - and even if you do not change that GPL s/w in any way - then you MUST make the source of YOUR APPLICATION available.
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 20:51
Agreed. I'd strongly recommend MIT over GPL. Or use LGPL.
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:49
what's the difference between MIT and LGPL?
I'm almost sure that I will change the license to a most appropriate one
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 22:50
The biggest difference is with GPL, improvements to the code must be shared back into the community and it's "viral", so code using it usually has to be open source if I recall correctly.
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:50
LGPL requires any modifications to be made public but you can binary link it with non-open source code
but the FSF advises not to use LGPL
and it can still cause issues
i'd advise just going with MIT - that's what .net have decided on
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 22:52
Agreed.
Especially since you're developing a pluggable component.
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:52
aha
LGPL seems OK
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:53
i'd personally advise against it but it's your choice
it would certainly make using it in commercial products less likely
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:54
well, any commercial products could get the component!
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:54
get the component?
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:54
the software licensed under LGPL, I mean
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:55
sorry, i don't understand what you mean
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:55
any sw could use a component licensed under LGPL without any problem
and be closed source
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:55
yeah, but their legal departments wouldn't like it ;)
it just makes licencing a bit harder
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:55
haha, what's the problem with that?
:)
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:56
:)
i did write a LGPL library years ago and it wasn't worth the hassle
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:56
if someone wants to improve the codebase, them they should provide the sources of the modification
the thing is, if someone gets your sources, modifies them and close the new version, it's unfair
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:57
well yeah if that's the way you see it then use the LGPL
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:57
unless the new version is so different that nobody could tell it was the original once upon a time!
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:57
but be aware that you may put off a certain amount of potential users
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:58
I'm also seeing that some works are licenses under Apache 2.0 and MIT
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 22:58
yeah, there's not much difference between those two
they're both very liberal
i'm not sure on the actual differences - something to do with patents i think
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 22:59
anyways, who is saying that my XamlReader will tease anyone!?
haha
The guys at Xamarin shielded the code, didn't they?
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 23:01
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:02
that's pretty reasonable, but if they hadn't done that, people like us would have had a great part of the work already done
a XamlReader is a very reusable piece of code
and complex
and it's absolutely worth porting it to PCL
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 23:03
Theoretically there's no reason it couldn't be a PCL by default. I'm not sure what .Net's XML cross plat story is though
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:04
the only thing i'd say is GPL is not suitable for a library if you want it to be used commercially. anything else is your choice, but the rest of .net is now MIT so that'd be my choice.
XLinq is available in PCLs
i believe
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:07

http://choosealicense.com/

Thanks for the link! it's really useful!

Every piece of .NET should be into PCLs
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 23:08
That's the general idea behind .Net Core
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:08
except for very specific features
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:08
unless you need something that isn't available!
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:08
hahaha
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:09
but yeah, hopefully in 5 years time PCLs won't be needed
if .net core works
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:09
for instance, AeroPeek
Windows Services
ShadowCopy
anything else? PORTABLE
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:09
depending on what platforms you're targetting there's a lot that's not available
FileStream for example
not available in WinRT
XmlDocument... Color... System.Windows.Bitmap...
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 23:10
.Net core will make all those available on WinRT though. That'll be nice
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:11
yep, really looking forward to it! especially an x-plat System.IO!!
lack of FileStream is really messing me about at work
Richard Simpson
@RichiCoder1
Feb 25 2015 23:12
Won't be long now. Though I'm not sure if they're aiming for post-//Build or Win10 launch for .net core's release.
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:13
i get the feeling it'll be a good few years before everything is in place
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:23
btw @SuperJMN - .net core have released a code formatter for their conventions
once it's stable i would be quite open to using those coding conventions instead of StyleCop's
José Manuel Nieto
@SuperJMN
Feb 25 2015 23:27
those underscores almost made me vomit
I've just commented the post
Steven Kirk
@grokys
Feb 25 2015 23:30
i knew you'd say that ;)
i don't think you'll convince them now