Random Feature Requests

[C=64]

Forgive me if these feature requests sound a bit demanding. It's just that I find overly polite, carefully worded requested end up being confusing and wordy.

• Smaller Buttons - Those 3 buttons are huge! I'm scared of pushing them, least I upset the mighty behemoths and draw their ire upon me... That, and they take up an awful lot of screen space.
• Filtering - Allow some sort of filter on the incoming files, either hard-coded or user defined. For example, I never want to see any EXE's, COM's, BAT's, or VBS's, as I'm a tad fearful of accidentally clicking on them (gee, I seem to be scared of clicking on a lot of things). The apparent "Very User Friendly" goal of Xolox entails users who may not be all that careful about what they download, after all.
• 'X' Actually Closes - Clicking the "Close" X on a search tab should close the window, not popup a menu with the sole choice of "close".
• Don't GPL - If you're considering releasing the source, please don't GPL it! Some of us are under work-related restrictions that keep us from reading/contributing to GPL'ed projects (Sigh... I hate viral licenses).

a) You did not understand the meaning of GPL.
b) Sueing open source as "viral" is anyoing proprietary philosophy, we dont like holly wars, please stop trolling.

[C=64]

Umm... huh? Whether or not I understand the GPL is irrelevant (and from your less then intelligible comments, I'm going to assume that I understand it a tad bit better then you - unless, of course English isn't your native tongue, in which case something appears to have been lost in the translation). It doesn't change the fact that if this is GPLed, I wouldn't be able to contribute. As I would like to contribute, I made the request that a non-GPL license be used if the project is considering become opened.

I have worked for a couple companies that have had similar policies, and so I'm doubting I'm the only one in this position. Whether I agree with my company's position or not, I've agreed to work for them, rendering it my responsibility to abiding by their edicts.

I did not see my request as trolling. I can see how my personal statement tacked on to the end (i.e. "Sigh... I hate viral licenses") as being a point of contention for you. I'm sorry that it offended you as deeply as it apparently has - that wasn't the intent. I would edit it out, but that wouldn't be fair to your posts. So, to all others reading that line of my sentence, please ignore it, and instead take the request at face value.

[rant]
In addition, if that comment mentioned above offends you, please skip to the end of this rant, which is posted as a defense of my position. This is not the proper forum to argue these issues, and if need be, we can arrange a separate venue for future correspondence.

Back to my understanding of the GPL. I know that, due to it's viral nature, I risk tainting projects when I observe GPLed code in that I may inadvertently repeat code I've observed. I wish to work on projects that aren't GPLed. Ergo, I cannot look at GPLed code. I'm at quite a loss to understand your comments. For example, where the heck did the "sueing" statement come form?

I also find it highly ironic that the "MS Borg" image is being used - the GPL is the true Borg of the license world, since the license is designed to consume other licenses, and zealous "defenders" of the license make it their duty to attack those licenses that it cannot consume until it can be (QT, for example). Please, take the time to actually read and study the license and it's implications before blindly defending it and pushing it on to others. As for myself, give me the BSD license any day.
[/rant]

Instead sueing GPL "viral", you could have said "I would like to see Xolox under xyz license".

If developers choose a specific license among a few Open Source licenses they might have a good reason. Some licenses are less or more strict - by reason - and you can choose which fits best to your project. Often discussed, often overlooked.
Sueing one license "viral" in general is a) denying the authors intention b) arouses the impression that other license models (including copyleft/copyright/closed sourced) have a build-in indispensable advantage over GPL.
By the way, sueing GPL "viral" is very Microsoft in these days, but that is another troll tale.

[C=64]

To begin, I think a point of confusion is your usage of "sueing". From your latest post, I gather you mean for it to be "saying" or "calling". Just to clarify, while "sueing" is not an actual word, it's a fairly common misspelling of "suing", which is the act of bringing legal charges against someone in court. With this in mind, your statements are a bit more comprehendible, but I still disagree with them nonetheless.

As I stated in my last post, this is not the venue to be discussing this. I still stand by my statements (both for my request of considering non-GPLed licenses and the GPL being a viral license). However, rather than argue my position, I'll be the bigger man and end this here.

You have not offered any alternative venue for this discussion, registered yourself on this forum, nor provided an email address. Thus, I have no means of contacting you besides this forum. Additionally, I hadn't (and won't) publicly provide my email account, in fear of unscrupulous folks that gather such details for spamming. Thus, you have no other way of reaching me.

So... I've gone ahead and created a throw-away hotmail account for myself, and have registered that as my Gnutella Forum email address. Please feel free to email me if you'd like to discuss this further.

Originally posted by C=64
I'll be the bigger man and end this here.

Troll terminating himself, great.

Btw BSD license is the potential "freeloader" under Open Source licenses (take but don't need to give back). You sue GPL to be a "virus", BSD license is a parasite then?

[C=64]

Sigh... by "end this here" I mean end the argument on this forum (i.e. the "here" part). I did not mean "end this." I'm sorry that I failed to convey this message - this time I'll try and make this more clear.

EMAIL ME (smitherswaylan@hotmail.com). Do NOT abuse this forum. WE are the only ones discussing this. WE are discussing an issue OUTSIDE of what this forum is meant to discuss. Thus, WE should carry on this conversation OUTSIDE this forum.

I am quite willing to carry on this discussion, being both ready to defend my position and rebuke your (poorly constructed) arguments. But I'd like to do it in a manner that isn't bothering other people. As such, I refuse to argue in this post, just as I refused in the last post. I'm sorry if you took my insistence on taking this conversation off-line as a sign of surrender, but I apparently need to point out being polite isn't the same as being beaten.

To conclude:
This is the last message I'm placing in this thread (notice: thread, not board). This is the last time I read this tread (again, notice: thread, not board). Thus, if you'd like to continue this discussion, EMAIL ME (smitherswaylan@hotmail.com). If, instead, you want to continue to argue with yourself, post here.


C=64

p.s. To anyone else following this, I apologize for taking a troll's bait. It was inappropriate to respond to him in the first place, and hopefully this post will be the end of it and this thread's rather useless content. If not... well, at least it won't be me fueling it any longer.