Re: Samba (was: OS-X vs. Windows)

["Adam Lang" <aalang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

That's the beauty though.  Samba has done all the reverse engineering.  All
that is being done is a port of the code to AS/400.

As for not doing it GPL, you have no choice if you are using Samba code
base.

Ya never know, if you do a good enough job, IBM might hire ya to help
support it if they adopt it.  You have to think of it this way also, all the
work has already been done and you get the beneift of it for free.  You are
just doing a little porting... compared tot he whole picture, not something
to get too defensive about to give for free.  You aren't building a better
mouse trap.  You're just moving the mouse trap someone else built to another
room of the house.

Something like this would be more hobby/enthusiast oriented.

Adam Lang
Systems Engineer
Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company
http://www.rutgersinsurance.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "jt" <jt@ee.net>
To: <midrange-l@midrange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 10:40 PM
Subject: RE: Samba (was: OS-X vs. Windows)


> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
> | [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Simon Coulter
> | Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:15 PM
> | To: midrange-l@midrange.com
> | Subject: Re: Samba (was: OS-X vs. Windows)
> | Importance: High

> Simon/anyone else?
>
> Netserver appears to be (how you say?...) SHAMBOLIC!  Sounds like a tough
> job, though, to reverse-engineer MicroScrew without docs...
>
> I'm EXTREMELY interested...
>
> However, I'm not at all sure I can contribute a whole lot...  Depends on a
> lot of factors.  I can read MI but can't "speak" the language.  Probably
> could debug some.  I could try to contribute in other ways, too.  Perhaps
> docs or marketing.
>
>
> Some other sticking points:
>
>
> I would think a native Samba/400 would be better than an AIX port, but
don't
> know for sure...
>
>
> Don't know that I'd do OSS...  But I will NOT work using the GPL.  From
Gnu
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html:
>
> "Thus, you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without
> modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to anyone
> anywhere. Being free to do these things means (among other things) that
you
> do not have to ask or pay for permission."
>
> Great philosophy, coming from a guy whose salary (from my understanding)
was
> paid by MIT when he developed e-Macs...  Don't work so hot, in my
situation.
> IOW, if I work my butt off for months to develop a better mousetrap, by
> definition of Gnu I MUST DONATE all my time and efforts to the
community...
> (I know..  I know..  I'm free to make ALL THE MONEY I want, as long as
it's
> from SECONDARY sources of income.  Just can't sell the software...
> Hmmmm....  What if ALL I PRODUCE is source code?  What if I code full-time
> and DON'T HAVE any secondary source of income to put some bread on the
> table...?!?)
>
>
> As it happens, I'm studing other possible licenses to use.  Haven't
studied
> them enough.  Studied GPL in detail already.
>
>
> If you're still interested, Simon (or anyone else), I'd need to know what
> improvements could be made over the AIX version of Samba, and what
timeframe
> you're looking to start...
>
> I'm not saying I'll only be able to help on something like this if there
was
> some money in it, but it'd sure help.  I can forward this, and the
original
> post to Jerry Sprout, but he's less likely to donate time than I am.  He's
> got more work than he can handle, and it pays cash.
>
> jt