Linux Engine Licensing - Please Read

[Lynn Fredricks]

> My end of the conversation dealt with that's already here:  
> Andre and others have server frameworks that run on a license 
> that's free.  I mentioned repeatedly to you that the license 
> for faceless use had historically always been free, for more 
> than a decade before RunRev acquired the engine.
>
> At that time you didn't ask me for the location of that 
> document, and didn't even cast any doubts about how I 
> described that license, as you did here yesterday.  But if 
> you need it now at least you have it.

I always assume you are telling me the truth Richard :-)

> My only question for you was whether RunRev would continue 
> this tradition. I feel it would be as good an idea today as 
> it was when Dr. 
> Raney first came up with it as a way of introducing the 
> language in an interesting space that doesn't impair sales of 
> the GUI product.
> 
> I still don't have the answer to that question; it's not 
> addressed in the v2.7 license, so for the moment anyone 
> wishing to evangelize Transcript use for servers has to 
> recommend the older engine.

The 2.7.x license doesn't reiterate the right to freely use the engine for
that purpose, right.

I don't want to get into a debate on this, but I want to set expectations
that server-side scripting is something that's getting taken very seriously
and being planned very carefully when it comes to licensing. A yes or no
answer spells out a strategy that Runtime isnt prepared yet to articulate
right now.


> I don't understand:  I don't see a BSD or Solaris forum 
> there, and I couldn't find either build in the pub/engines/ 
> folder at ftp.runrev.com.

Solaris got tossed in with the other 'nixs on the forum.

> I use a host that maintains a server farm preconfigured for 
> using the engine (TierraNet.com), but they use BSD so until I 
> get a new build I have to use the old one.
> 
> Fortunately the old engine handles the basics well for server 
> use so it's not that critical.

Okay, that's good.

> >> I've been using Transcript as my language-of-choice on my servers 
> >> since before RunRev Ltd. was born.  It's nice that the world is 
> >> finally changing so I no longer feel the need to apologize 
> for that 
> >> choice (remember the '90s when people wrote web apps in C? Ewwww).
> > 
> > Now Rich, you arent the sort who gets enraged when he sees Grateful 
> > Dead stickers on SUVs, right?:-)
> 
> That one's lost on me.  Writing web apps in C is pretty 
> craptastic given
>   its productivity relative to higher-level languages; note 
> that the current buzz is about "Ruby on Rails", not "C on Rails". ;)

I wouldn't want to do it.

> While many of my friends love the Dead I don't have any of 
> their albums, and none of their music was written in a 
> strongly-typed compiled language.

Well there's a thought - if musicians wrote code, what would they write in?

> I own an SUV but mostly for camping; I drive only about once 
> a week or less, and between the metro train and compact 
> fluorescents and other conservation actions I take my 
> personal BTU consumption is far below that of most sedan 
> owners.  And neither SUVs nor sedans can be easily configured 
> for CGI use.
> 
> :\

But this has set you thinking, hasn't it? :-)

Best regards,


Lynn Fredricks
Worldwide Business Operations
Runtime Revolution, Ltd