Index
> Windows > A question about dialog resources. |
| Author |
|
|
Betov 04 Jul 2003, 08:43
I really don't know, but i suppose that this is impossible, as long as there is no record for indicating such organisations inside the Dialog components Records.
This may be done by runing Sub-Dialogs at Run-Time. Betov. By the way, John, under what License are you developing this? |
|||
04 Jul 2003, 08:43 |
|
|
JohnFound 04 Jul 2003, 08:57
Hi Betov.
After reading all possible help files, I think that this is imposible too, but with 1 little exception. If you define group box aftersome radio buttons. The radio buttons becomes one group. Actually they are not childs of defined group box. If then some other radio buttons are defined (after first group box) they becomes another group. This makes my work easy, but less powerfull.  
I am thinking about some workaround. 
Quote: By the way, John, under what License are you developing this? Actually I still don't know. Why you think this is important? It will be freeware with open source, I think (or donationware - unfortunately my budget is not very good at this moment ) In any case it will not be shareware or nagware. |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 08:57 |
|
|
Betov 04 Jul 2003, 09:45
Not "important", but why i ask the question is because i see you re-inventing SpAsm and going to do a lot of work that has already be done. Under GPL, things that may be possibly re-usable save a lot of time.
I already proposed this to Thomasz a long time ago: SpAsm Dialog Editor, with very few added work, may output what is needed for FASM, and even if you don't like this Editor, there are a lot of Data and infos directely reusable, inside... Well... under GPL...  (for example, the complete management of the various Flag conflicts and requirements -in the ExcludedBits and MustHaveBits Tables -that other Dialogs Editors do not have usually-, plus Help system, and so on...).
Betov. |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 09:45 |
|
|
scientica 04 Jul 2003, 09:49
JohnFound wrote:
Why not use the the fasm license as base/template and make som modifications to it to siute you? (I think it's okay with privalov). _________________ ... a professor saying: "use this proprietary software to learn computer science" is the same as English professor handing you a copy of Shakespeare and saying: "use this book to learn Shakespeare without opening the book itself. - Bradley Kuhn |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 09:49 |
|
|
JohnFound 04 Jul 2003, 10:04
scientica wrote: Why not use the the fasm license as base/template and make som modifications to it to siute you? (I think it's okay with privalov). Hm. I am not read the FASM license word by word, but I think there are some obscurity about who belongs the rights for the modified versions of the FASM. I am absolutely agree that rights for FASM core and compiler at all belongs to Privalov - he is the only author of FASM. But what about modified versions, and programs that uses FASM engine as part of the application, not as external tool. I think that Privalov is the only man who can answer this questions. Regards John Found |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 10:04 |
|
|
JohnFound 04 Jul 2003, 10:13
Betov wrote: Not "important", but why i ask the question is because i see you re-inventing SpAsm and going to do a lot of work that has already be done. Under GPL, things that may be possibly re-usable save a lot of time. I am reinventing the wheel almost all the time.  IMO this is the half of the pleasure of programming. Actually I am intending to re-invent not SpAsm, but Delphi, only just for assembler. |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 10:13 |
|
|
scientica 04 Jul 2003, 10:51
JohnFound wrote: I think there are some obscurity about who belongs the rights for the modified versions of the FASM. I'm not talking about the license of the fasm cutomisations, the changes are to be blamed on the modifer, but the credits goes to Privalov
I'm speaking of taking the license and modifying it, thus modifying it to something like this: Code: FooBar XP version 1.47 Copyright (c) 1879-1901, Ty Coon. All rights reserved. This program is free for commercial and non-commercial use as long as the following conditions are aheared to. Copyright remains Ty Coon and as such any Copyright notices in the code are not to be removed. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. You may NOT use this software for spamming purposes, unless the purpose is to stop, limit or counter act spamming. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or derivative of this code cannot be changed. i.e. this code cannot simply be copied and put under another distribution licence (including the GNU Public Licence). (anti spam useage added, and name/date changed, ...) _________________ ... a professor saying: "use this proprietary software to learn computer science" is the same as English professor handing you a copy of Shakespeare and saying: "use this book to learn Shakespeare without opening the book itself. - Bradley Kuhn |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 10:51 |
|
|
Betov 04 Jul 2003, 10:53
This is nothing but what i am doing... Go luck to you, and, again, if under GPL, i, and SpAsm are there to help, not to compete
Please, think twice of the License, this is important for the life length of your work, and there is no contradiction between GPL, and asking users for money donations (though, don't hope that much, in any case )...
Betov. |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 10:53 |
|
|
comrade 04 Jul 2003, 12:26
Licenses are for bastard capistalists.
 |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 12:26 |
|
|
Betov 04 Jul 2003, 15:44
Thanks for the so intelligent remark, comrade...
John, even if you are not interrested with my offer (i have nothing to sell...), as long as you are going to re-do all the things i have already done, and even if you prefer working for nope under Thomasz License than under GPL, for some reason that i ignore, -and, surely, that i will never undertand, even if you explain me slowly -, i will remain available for the help i can provide and for the various Data, knowledges and Infos i have collected.
Betov. |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 15:44 |
|
|
scientica 04 Jul 2003, 16:10
comrade wrote: Licenses are for bastard capistalists. We live in a such world to day, the captial of capitalism is controling the world (via more or less acceptable methods) 
Seriously, licenses make it possible to phrohibit capitalistic usage, by the capitalistic rules  _________________ ... a professor saying: "use this proprietary software to learn computer science" is the same as English professor handing you a copy of Shakespeare and saying: "use this book to learn Shakespeare without opening the book itself. - Bradley Kuhn |
|||
|
04 Jul 2003, 16:10 |
|
|
jInuQ 05 Jul 2003, 05:28
If I remember right who ever holds the copyright can change the license from what ever to what ever. It can't be Ex Postfacto tho' so if you have a copy of the work under GPL even if the copyright holder changes the license to some proprietary license you can still use the GPL'ed copy. As always you should talk with a lawyer.
_________________ jInuQ "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de Saint Exupery |
|||
|
05 Jul 2003, 05:28 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|