Specific criticiszm goes to Jens. From what I can see, there is a trend here -- Jens copies the function, changes it a little and says that he wrote it.

Aside from the fact that HE DIDN'T WRITE IT, this causes a bigger problem -- version control.

You'll have different people (the people we are all trying to help by creating these functions) confused by which function is which. Some people will use one while other people use a different one.

As the author of some of the functions over at ScriptLogic, I don't mind seeing them posted here, provided they are posted exactly as they are -- without changes. If you want to make changes -- e-mail the author and request that changes be made.

----

I originally gave permission for our functions to be published, but in light of this BS, I have to re-evaluate that. The information, public domain or otherwise, is copyrighted information -- let's stop the infringement!

We like to keep this forum free of posts that do not contain UDF's, so could you please repost this thread in the suggestions forum?

Furthermore... It might be a good idea to just E-mail Jens and discuss the matter with him personally and not take such brash childish actions on the board.

Thanx in advance.

This thread will be deleted after three days.

You've eloquently put into words, exactly what I've been feeling all day ... here, here. I second your comments !

-Shawn

I personally take offense to you accusing "members" (plural) of such an act. If you have a personal dislike of something an individual has done, you should take it up with them and not post and accuse the board as a whole. I have no idea if your right or wrong, but I do know that your post is not what I would call a diplomatic or appropriate response.

Don't get your panties all caught up in a wad over this. Linux is a much bigger program then either KiXtart or a UDF and I don't need any ones permission to modify anything in it.

Out of personal professionalism I think credit should be given where appropriate, but flying off the handle and making unproven accusations is also quite inappropriate and lowers one's own personal credit.

Even if i don't really care what other does with my stuff as long as it stay free, I also think credits should go where they have to go.

Nothing personal Brian, but even it this has to be solved, no need to shit on the whole board.

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: Alex.H ]

OK, I'm not in a bashing mood, however I know that I have copied routines in whole off this board and used them, and modified them, and reposted them.

I know that others have done the same to some of my scripts that I have placed here, most notably the OS detection script, and you know what... They are most welcome to. I pulled code for that from at least 3 other scripts, and have the input from many others to assemble to he script to the point I felt satisfied with it... Then others have expanded upon that.

That is exactly what this board is for and should be encouraged.

The problem you have with this is that You are selling a product at your site and the more unique material you have there the more 'value' you feel that your site has. Whether or not Jens (or others) and been modifying scripts that your company has published, is an issue that you need to take up with him (or them)

For all purposes kixtart is freeware, and all script content here and all the others boards are free. If you are really interested in reserving the code you claim for scriptlogic, post it here yourself, before someone else does and claim credit for it.

PS, not that it matters I only come to this site for kix related stuff, I've been on brainbuzz, and I've reviewed an old version of scriptlogic, but nothing beats notepad and this site.

cj

You really shouldn't set yourself up for a public flaming in this fashion.

Especially when you consider this post - I guess you are the same "bstyles" as in the 4th response? Glass houses and stones?

Your reaction, presumably in a moment of madness is badly directed.

You would have gotten a far better response by talking directly to the individual postees and asking them to amend their posts to (say) change the documentation to keep the original author detail and maintain an amendment history section where they document changes made.

That approach would have improved the format of the documentation area for the benefit of the entire KiXtart community, and you would have been the hero rather than the villain.

However you have gotten out of your pram and stamped your feet in a public fashion which simply make you and your company by association of your comments appear to be antagonistic, immature and not the sort of people anyone would want to do business with.

I'm sure that this is not the case, so I suggest you take a couple of deep breaths, bite your tongue and find a way of redeeming yourself in the eyes of the KiXtart community.

These boards are fun places to be, and I'd hate to see divisions amongst my KiXtart bretheren because of a reckless posting.

cheers,

Please accept my apologies for posting UDFs with incorrect headers. It was never my intention to claim other peoples work as my own. I have since removed the offending UDF and am now pointing to the ScriptLogic UDF section at http://www.scriptlogic.com/Kixtart/FunctionLib.asp.
I have made a mistake by posting code segments containing internal UDF headers that should not have been posted here. I have also sent a private email to bstyles apologizing for my actions.

Jens

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: sealeopard ]

1) My panties are not in a bunch (not wearing them today -- chose briefs instead this morning).

2) If I took up the matter directly with Jens, we couldn't have this wonderful open and fun discussion, now could we?

3) Jens: I didn't want you to remove the UDFs from this site -- I am glad that you took your time to cross-post them here. Just looking for some credit (and version control). We regularly get suggestion on how to improve the functions and we always include the person who suggested the changes when they are published.

4) Aside from seeking credit, one point which got lost is establishing some sort of version control system -- if someone takes someone else's UDF and changes it, document those changes, including dates, so that everyone who has downloaded the old function can choose to update and know why.

5) I don't need to be bashed for speaking what's on my mind -- there are always two sides to every situation and with all the high IQs here, you should be able to handle my post without taking an offensive position.

6) Alex: I have re-read my message, and can't seem how you can consider it 'shitting on this board.' If this board is to be censored, and one can't speak their mind, I'm really disappointed.

7) I've personally contributed a lot to the KiXtart effort. So has the company I work for. We were the first to create a UDF related website. We were the first site to create Beta and Wish List forums. We're the only site to have a function voting system (where Ruud reviews the stats regularly). We work directly with Ruud -- suggestions and heavy alpha/beta testing. All I'm saying is that I'm on your side -- we're all in this together -- same team -- get it?

Again, I don't mind being flamed -- I knew I took that chance when posting. I did have to express my opinion though. I lecture regularly -- I can take the critics. Did anyone (other than Lonkero) even try to look at it from my perspective?

Cheers,
-Brian

Note: We've been working on a complete UDF management system that will allow functions to be submitted to a database and managed by the author. There will be a RFC system, where each function can be discussed. Visitors can use checkboxes to e-mail the functions to them in a ready-to-go KiX file. Of course, the voting system will remain too. It will be a turnkey system -- much better than attempting to use a generic forum system. I WANT to see all your functions posted to this database (In fact we're looking for beta testers). Again, we're on the same team. Any takers?

If you re-read the earlier post on the subject you'll find that I didn't have any issue with your concerns, and nor do the other respondants. The problem is the way that you expressed yourself.

Re-read your original posting. As a regular lecturer you will recognise why you managed to upset people.
1) You unnecesarilly personalised the direction of the complaint - you picked on someone.
2) You issued threats: "I originally gave permission for our functions to be published, but in light of this BS, I have to re-evaluate that"

That's not the way to get people on your side as I guess you've discovered.

You are absolutley right to voice your concerns. You just might want to apply the 10 minute rule for postings. I know I have the same problem with email - what I write at first can look imflammatory and offensive when I review it 10 minutes later before hitting the send button.

"-- we're all in this together -- same team -- get it?" Well, that's how it used to feel, I'm not so sure now

The function database seems like a great idea. I've been frustrated when trying to submit UDF's to the ScriptLogic forum. Some of the functions were pretty good, others could have been better, er, thought out first. But not getting any reply and not seeing them posted was frustrating.

I'd relax some on the idea of version control. UDF's are too freestyle to try to enforce this concept. If a function is incorporated into KiXtart, then Ruud can control the function to his heart's content.

The only thing I'd suggest re: version control is that two different functions cannot have the same name. If a modification to an existing function is submitted by the author, make that the "master" function. (Would this mean that an author could password protect a function to only allow the author or ScriptLogic to modify the base entry?)

The voting thing is good. However, I hope Ruud will use this cautiously. Some functions have limited usefulness by themselves, but would be immensely useful in KiXtart. For instance, it is probably easier to just write the one line of code for ABS() or MOD() unless it is used several times within a script, so I think they have limited usefulness as UDF's. However, I would love to see these included in KiXtart.

Thanks,

New Mexico Mark

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: New Mexico Mark ]

It's not your point of view that we disagree with. It's the tone of the post that got us (or at least me) a bit vexed. This board has always had a great reputation when considering politeness and friendlyness. I'm a great believer in Freedom of Speech too, but posting in the tone of voice that you use is imho very out of place here...

All the regulars on this board contribute their wonderful knowledge freely and without any form of restrictions. That's what made this board great, and I guess that's why you became a member too...

Another thing about this board is that it's completly voluntary instead of having a commercial viewpoint...

quote:

---

"-- we're all in this together -- same team -- get it?"

---

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: DrillSergeant ]

Don't sweat it mate ! Your stock around around is still rising. And your tomes of usefull, highly original work far outweights this minor bump in the road. Please keep up the great work and don't let this distract you in anyway. Keep'em coming !

Version Control ? I have to fully agree with Mark on this one ... no big deal ... we're just talking a bit of canned kixtart code after all. Seen plenty of that over the years.

-Shawn

Right now, I'm thinking about how to properly post my systems management server script (close to 150KB in three scripts).

Jens

Indeed we agree also with DrillSergeant that this forum is first of all for
UDF's, but moving this post to another forum would be wrong. It is specific
related to the information published on this forum. One of those topics
you may not miss during reading topics on this forum.
At this moment there are only five topics specific related to this forum,
which doesn't contain an UDF.

One of the goals of this specific forum was:
don't create a new site for storing and publishing UDF scripts and
prevent the loss of a good script in all kind of other topics.
Another goal was that some guidelines will guarantee the quality of UDF's.

It can never be the goal - in our opinion - to copy scripts from other sites
with removing author/link information. It can only be necessary to reformat
those scripts to the guidelines of this forum f.e. add examples and make
a [code] ... [/code] section.
Also it can never be the goal - without informing the author - to remove
his address before publishing it on the internet. Code is always recogni-
zable for authors is our experience and an author should always get the
credits.
We agree with NTDOC that we doesn't need any ones permission to modify
anything in Linux, but this doesn't mean you are directly publishing it.
Also Linux is a complete other world, which is general public world wide
but it doesn't mean that organizations can't create commercial products
for Linux without loosing their rights.

It might be a good idea to E-mail doesn't mean Brian didn't do this
already.
Also we doesn't see it as a personal discussion between both, but we find also
unproven accusations is out of place not only on this board but also in emails.
Such discussion may afraid other members for publishing information on this
board, which should never be the goal.
It is more to be aware of what is happening on this forum.

We shouldn't forget other kind of discussions on this board. Many times
members are complaining about commercial activities of some members.
- Sometimes it was pure commercial and those members doesn't get a wave of
criticism about it.
- In other situations only pointing to a commercial site returns all kind
of criticism about it.
For us it was and is never annoying. Such kind of criticism looks like
discrimination and can be also very dangerous for KiXtart (a product from Ruud
van Velsen or Microsoft?) itself.

Radimus remark about all script content here and all the others boards
are free we doesn't subscribe. Any publication of information on the inter-
net isn't for free. Publisher can lay down rules (license agreement) to his infor-
mation. Strictly speaking published shareware/careware isn't freeware.
Freeware doesn't mean also you can do hardly anything without respect for the
effort of creator. General speaking: it is forbidden that other persons get
financial profit of other effort.
Freeware means: you can use it without paying for it and without all kind of
unwanted restrictions. Mostly the author doesn't like and doesn't permit the
removement of his credits.

greetings:

btw: This thread will be deleted after three days isn't possible anymore.
All kind of members put reactions to it. A possible deletion (or better: move) was
and is in our opinion only possible, when this topic was directly closed for
other reactions.
So only move it to another forum and give the different members the credits for
their parts.

If you release the code/source code and post it on a public forum, you have basically given up all rights to it, most communities will agree that it is sufficient just to give credit to the author(s) for the effort.

Nowhere in the code does it specify that such code cannot be tampered with and\or modified without the authors consent, nor does the posting request/require that you agree to it.

Now while the above is a simplistic view of my experience with copyright law (and I'm not trying to be a lawyer). It is usually assumed that if you publish/post something in a public forum that is a resouce, you are EXPECTING/Allowing people to use it. As a COURTESY you would expect (and it is reasonable) that if that material were to be posted somewhere else that credit would go with the author. However, if the code was modified in some way (probably in some functional way, it isn't the same code anymore and the new author can lay claim for it).Freeware licence agreements usually require to acknowledge that a specific entity wrote that program and wants to retain credit for it. That is a fair correlation to the code that is posted in any forums.

I don't expect that Shawn, or Bryce, or Sergeant, or kdyer, or the many others that have provided insight here; expect half of my logonscript to contain acknowledgements to their contributions to it.

Now if Someone was to do a RedHat and collect 1000 UDFs. Bryce's beginners guide, the help file version of the kix manual, a half dozen useful freeware DOS utilities, and links to the good Kix sites and tried to distribute a retail CD to make money from it... That is an entirely different subject. (I wonder how much I could charge for that.. )

In any case, The 2 parties involved have come to an understanding and have apologized to each other as appropriate and it is water under the bridge, as it were.

Anyone remember the old joke about Bill Gates trying to copyright Binary digits (0's and 1's) therefore any computer code that gets translated into binary at any level infringes on Microsoft's patent...

First we agree completly with your answer about the effort of Scriptlogic for
KiXtart. The first 'shit' of alpha versions were taken only by you.
The public releases are only beta, release candidates and final releases.
We think Scriptlogic does many more for the KiXtart community than we known.

Secondly we appreciate that people speak their mind. On one hand everybody is
using his own way of writting, on the other hand everybody has his own way of
reading and interpretating information.
We prefer the clear way and we doesn't have any problem with the way of express
yourself. People should never forget the goal of it.

Third your re-evaluation would be a bad idea, but everybody should respect the
site license agreements (see our previous reaction for more about this).
Brian you are playing it clean by putting this possibility to the main topic.

Fourth we should handle all members in the same way with no regard to commercial
organizations. Everybody can make a note to too much commercial activities of
members without a real contribution.
F.e. a lot of members are liking and sometimes only using the online kixtart
help file of Scriptlogic. We like their Development Report page very much.

Fifth Jens we subscribe completly Shawns second reaction. Keep on
going. We doesn't see it as something personal discussion from Brian.

At least we are working all together for the same goal: let KiXtart be the one.
and
by-the-way Brian can you more explain "what are the tasks for beta testers"?
Interest, who knows.
greetings.

btw: when you consider "this post" doesn't imply this conclusion.
Only bstyles' remark about "Combine these routines with the UDF capabilities of KIX2001
and what do you get?" (related to DateMath & DateSerial) draws our attention to the new
capabilities of UDFs.
Such suggestions are always welcome to this board.
A clear look at those UDFs shows us that we should:
- use not only the name of author but also the name of publisher
- in some situations the author of UDF wasn't the creator of algoritm. in some cases the
author only translate an algorithm to a KiXtart script.
On one hand everybody is using his own way of writting, on the other hand everybody has
his own way of reading and interpretating information.

btw: he can do with his linux what he wants isn't completly true. he may only
sold it for cost price.

btw: our previous reaction was already prepared on first reactions. this reaction is
some additional stuff to it.