#MAC 10.5 EMULATOR SOFTWARE#
#MAC 10.5 EMULATOR LICENSE#

Personally, the only real motive I could see from a project that remains closed source far into its progress is to compete head-on with the software the fork originated from.

#MAC 10.5 EMULATOR LICENSE#

I do not program anymore, but if I ever decided to do it again and my source was available, I would try to choose a license that limits certain rights, while still allowing the use of the source under certain conditions. Quote from: Lionel Debroux on November 20, 2012, 04:27:47 am If nspire_emu were licensed under a license that forbids closed-source derivatives, indeed, SpiroH's forks should be taken down.ДЄh that sucks. Him not showing signs of getting a clue about why what he's doing is harmful to the community, and not providing his reasoning for doing so, has raised exasperation. The release of that version was delayed as a result of SpiroH's closed-source forks. That version doesn't have UI improvements, GDB support, partial Nspire CAS+ support - the sum of which represents thousands of lines of changes and reorganization in the source code. Despite gentle (and explicative, at the beginning) calls from multiple persons to lighten up, he keeps spewing closed source forks based on an outdated version of nspire_emu. However, unlike all other persons who worked on nspire_emu and/or its derivatives, SpiroH has proved otherwise. However, the license of nspire_emu (rather, the lack thereof) allows anybody to fork it, without providing the sources of the fork, without contributing modifications back to upstream, without trying to work with upstream, or anything.ДЄ possible reason for that state of fact (I don't know) is that Goplat assumed that people would be good citizens and would care about the community, so a license that forbids closed-source derivatives would be superfluous. If nspire_emu were licensed under a license that forbids closed-source derivatives, indeed, SpiroH's forks should be taken down.

Mac 10.5 emulator