taskSavannah Administration - Tasks: task #10002, Submission of FreeControl

 
 

task #10002: Submission of FreeControl

Submitter:  Quique Rodriguez <qruso>
Submitted:  Wed 23 Dec 2009 12:42:27 AM UTC
   
 
Should Start On:  Wed 23 Dec 2009 12:00:00 AM UTC Should be Finished on:  Sat 02 Jan 2010 12:00:00 AM UTC
Category:  Project Approval Priority:  * 5 - Normal
Status:  Done Privacy:  Public
Assigned to:  marioxcc Open/Closed:  Closed
* Mandatory Fields

Add a New Comment Rich Markup
   

Jump to the original submission

Sun 27 Dec 2009 08:47:13 PM UTC, comment #9: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

December 27th 2009 in GNU Savannah item 10002: "Submission of
FreeControl"

Hi,

I approve your project, enojoy mantining it at savannah!.

The project summary page is https://savannah.nongnu.org/p/freecontrol.

Regards.

Item status changes:

Status -> Done
Open/Closed -> Closed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREIAAYFAks3x3wACgkQZ4DA0TLic4hysgCdFWJMVmudJ/ekN5m61qeBFMK2
rW4An1RScJi28q6l+cvlsF6ca98giNQV
=MyMg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc>
Sun 27 Dec 2009 08:19:09 PM UTC, comment #8: 

New tarball uploaded.

(file #19377)

Quique Rodriguez <qruso>
Sun 27 Dec 2009 07:41:52 PM UTC, comment #7: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

December 27th 2009 in GNU Savannah item 10002: "Submission of
FreeControl"

>I was talking about this... I sad that "there is no problem to use
>(the term) "propietary" software (instead of "privative" software).


Ok, that's much more clear.

>where it says "Copyright does not cover ideas. If someone contributes
>ideas but no text, these ideas may be morally significant as
>contributions, and worth giving credit for, but they are not
>significant for copyright purposes.  Likewise, bug reports do not
>count for copyright purposes."


It means that if someone makes a suggestion, it is not significant for
Copyright but in this case there are a text, and therefore is
Copyrightable and should carry the copyright information just as the
source files.

>Ok, there's no problem.  What I said about thinking in some cases, in
>the future, to use some non-free library, it's only to perform some
>non-free communication protocol like "ethernet/IP" o some others, but
>there is no problem to avoid communicating with these devices if they
>can give a free communication protocol.


Yes, I understand wath you say, but we don't allow it because a free
program wich don't run on a free enviroment dont contributes to our
freedom, just increases the social dependenciement on non free
software.

Upload a new tarball with the changes alredy noted aplied, if all is
ok I will approve the submission.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREIAAYFAks3uEMACgkQZ4DA0TLic4hCQwCfaxda4v0tbdxUwKdJ0WthoV2V
IEMAnipMfPUWEKUxz9XPS+vswseQJGsj
=oEV+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc>
Sun 27 Dec 2009 02:19:10 AM UTC, comment #6: 

Rewinding....

In you original reply you said:

> You may think that in english we say "privative" because of
> spanish
> term "softwre privativo", but no, we say "propietary software",
> please
> change it to avoid confussion.


I was talking about this... I sad that "there is no problem to use (the term) "propietary" software (instead of "privative" software).

> You understood bad, the guidelines as rest of files need the
> licence.
> Where do you read such thing?, if you readed it on an GNU page
> let us
> know to correct it if nessesary.


It can be I'm misunderstanding. I inferred it from the page http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Legally-Significant.html#Legally-Significant

where it says "Copyright does not cover ideas. If someone contributes ideas but no text, these ideas may be morally significant as contributions, and worth giving credit for, but they are not significant for copyright purposes. Likewise, bug reports do not count for copyright purposes."

> So, programs must not depend on propetary software. The
> programs
> here hosted may work on propietary platoform but they should
> provide
> at least the same functionallity in a fully free platform.


Ok, there's no problem.  What I said about thinking in some cases, in the future, to use some non-free library, it's only to perform some non-free communication protocol like "ethernet/IP" o some others, but there is no problem to avoid communicating with these devices if they can give a free communication protocol.

Quique Rodriguez <qruso>
Sun 27 Dec 2009 12:50:48 AM UTC, comment #5: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

December 26th 2009 in GNU Savannah item 10002: "Submission of
FreeControl"

>Please don't place it out of context!!  when I said "There is no
>problem to use "propietary software"" I mean to use the term
>"propietary" instead of "pivative".  My idea is not to use propietary
>software.


Oh, I didn't catch well.  Your english is a bit confussing, I mean
that paragraph in specific.

As I understand you don't like to use the propietary software, if is
the case you should not say the sentence "There is no problem to use
propietary software", it is the same as "It is ok to use propietary
software".

>>> How can I correct this issue?


>> Wath issue do you talk about?. I dont't catch.


>I was talking about the text of the description of the project, to
>place "propietary" instead of "privative"


Oh, don't care.  That description is only used in the evaluation
processes, when approveed (If it happens) you will be able to set
another description.

>I'm not sure if it needs the licence.  They are only gidelines for the
>project, they are only ideas.  Ideas don't need the licence, It's what I
>understood, if not, there is no problem, i will add it.


You understood bad, the guidelines as rest of files need the licence.
Where do you read such thing?, if you readed it on an GNU page let us
know to correct it if nessesary.

>The original idea is make this project under GNU/Linux, and using gcc.


>In the future we will need to communicate with some dedicated
>hardware.  In this cases the idea also is not to use propietary
>software, but in some cases this option can exist.  I think that in
>this situation we will need to discuss if it's convenient.  But my
>first idea is NOT TO USE PROPIETARY SOFTWARE.


- From hosting requirements:

"The program should deliver its full functionality and convenience on
a completely free platform based on a free operating system, such as
GNU/Linux, working entirely with other free software. Otherwise it
would be an inducement to install non-free operating systems or other
non-free software."

So, programs must not depend on propetary software.  The programs
here hosted may work on propietary platoform but they should provide
at least the same functionallity in a fully free platform.

As example: GNU Emacs works on Windows, but works better on GNU
systems, so they comply with this requirement :).

In this case, if the program communicates with dedicated hardware must
do it with a free library or else no comunicate with that hardware.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREIAAYFAks2r04ACgkQZ4DA0TLic4hMTwCgiBpPEwlIt8x7pLveztPZON3r
14sAnjUy23em1YJNuan6ttBy+pMZVjM+
=H+Ny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc>
Sat 26 Dec 2009 11:59:36 PM UTC, comment #4: 

Please don't place it out of context!!  when I said "There is no problem to use "propietary software"" I mean to use the term "propietary" instead of "pivative".  My idea is not to use propietary software.

>> How can I correct this issue?


> Wath issue do you talk about?. I dont't catch.


I was talking about the text of the description of the project, to place "propietary" instead of "privative"

> I see alredy you uploaded a tarball, all seems exept the odf
> file, it
> need the licence information just as the C files.


I'm not sure if it needs the licence.  They are only gidelines for the project, they are only ideas.  Ideas don't need the licence, It's what I understood, if not, there is no problem, i will add it.

> We also need an list of the dependencies of the project (OS,
> libraries, programs, etc...)


The original idea is make this project under GNU/Linux, and using gcc.

In the future we will need to communicate with some dedicated hardware.  In this cases the idea also is not to use propietary software, but in some cases this option can exist.  I think that in this situation we will need to discuss if it's convenient.  But my first idea is NOT TO USE PROPIETARY SOFTWARE.

Quique Rodriguez <qruso>
Sat 26 Dec 2009 07:44:32 PM UTC, comment #3: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

December 26th 2009 in GNU Savannah item 10002: "Submission of
FreeControl"

>There is no problem to use "propietary software".


To use propietary software is an signan of be carelessy about your
freedom.  Of course is not as bad as make propietary software but is
an hypocritical act.

Did you mean "There is no problem to use private software"?.

Chech this for more information about how we call diferent class of
software: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html.

>How can I correct this issue?


Wath issue do you talk about?. I dont't catch.

>Please, give me a few days, I will add an initial version of the
>sources.


I see alredy you uploaded a tarball, all seems exept the odf file, it
need the licence information just as the C files.

We also need an list of the dependencies of the project (OS,
libraries, programs, etc...)

>Also exists a few softwares to do this, but the once I know, work
>over Windows, are propietary, and it's not the best platform to
>perform real time processing.


Wath platform you will use?.

For be hosted in savannah you must make the software to run on an
fully free platform.

Regards
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREIAAYFAks2ZigACgkQZ4DA0TLic4h2aACeM52iERcpIlUNo/Gj5P/evJPv
ofYAni1HjEFe3SLjY4IQMgtSLZ9GWxDh
=g2En
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc>
Fri 25 Dec 2009 11:05:33 PM UTC, comment #2: 

Is Argentina we use to say "propietario", but somebody from FSFLA corrected me to use the term "privativo".  There is no problem to use "propietary software".  How can I correct this issue?

Please, give me a few days, I will add an initial version of the sources.

The idea is to create a software to allow a PC to be used as a PLC (do you know what is a PLC).

The PLC are dedicated hardware to perform automation functions.  It has a CPU and several IO boards.  It has program memory and data memory.  It has a propietary firmware that executes the program.

The program is designed with specific software that mainly runs over Windows.  This software is propietary, its created to be used with a specific brand or a specific line of products of a brand.

Therefore, when you decide to use a PLC you need to select a brand.  Then the price of the equipment is very high because you can't change it.  Also the price of the software is high and the performance of this software is always low compared to other kind of programs, because of the low demand.

Also exists a few softwares to do this, but the once I know, work over Windows, are propietary, and it's not the best platform to perform real time processing.

Quique Rodriguez <qruso>
Wed 23 Dec 2009 09:58:20 PM UTC, comment #1: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

December 23th 2009 in GNU Savannah item 10002: "Submission of
FreeControl"

Hi,
 
I'm evaluating the project you submitted for approval in
Savannah.

You may think that in english we say "privative" because of spanish
term "softwre privativo", but no, we say "propietary software", please
change it to avoid confussion.

Please include a URL pointing to the source code that you have
currently. Alternatively, you can forward the code to me by email or
attach it to this tracker.

We wish to review your source code, even if it is not functional, to
catch potential legal issues early.

For example, to release your program properly under the GNU GPL you
must include a copyright notice and permission-to-copy statements at
the beginning of every copyrightable file, usually any file more than
10 lines long.  This is explained in
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html.  Our review would help
catch potential omissions such as these.

All the nontrival (Usually 10+ lines) files must carry appropiate
Copyright and licenc notices (This include ODF files), check
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Notices.html and
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html#howto for more information.

Note that sending code to our repositories is a release, since the
code will then be publicly available through anonymous access.

The term "automation or control systems" is too general and unclear.
Can you be more specific about wath the program will do?.

Regards.

Item status changes:

Assigned to -> marioxcc
Status -> In progress
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREIAAYFAksyklsACgkQZ4DA0TLic4gbzgCeOhSIrwLtWZDbArlNO/C5DweB
ANAAniE3Q7NlddKn2G1B2cxVrGn5IDnH
=bvJl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc>
Wed 23 Dec 2009 12:42:27 AM UTC, original submission:  

A new project has been registered at Savannah
This project account will remain inactive until a site admin approves or discards the registration.


Registration Administration


While this item will be useful to track the registration process, approving or discarding the registration must be done using the specific Group Administration page, accessible only to site administrators, effectively logged as site administrators (superuser):



Registration Details


  • Name: FreeControl
  • System Name:  freecontrol
  • Type: non-GNU software & documentation
  • License: GNU General Public License v2 or later





Description:

This project is to create:
    - A free control software that runs on a free OS.
    - A free universal software to program this free control software or different PLCs

This soft will allow to use a PC as a PLC to perform automation o control systems.  Also will provide a free software to program different PLCs instead of privative software.


Tarball URL:

http://savannah.gnu.org/submissions_uploads/FreeControl_0.0.1.tar.gz


Quique Rodriguez <qruso>

 

(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

Attach Files:
   
   
Comment:
   

Attached Files
file #19377:  FreeControl_0.0.3.tar.gz added by qruso (51KiB - application/x-gzip)
file #19369:  FreeControl_0.0.2.tar.gz added by qruso (45KiB - application/x-gzip)

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by marioxcc (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by qruso (Submitted the item)
  •  

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

    Only logged-in users can vote.

     

    Follow 6 latest changes.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2009-12-27 marioxcc StatusIn Progress Done
        Open/ClosedOpen Closed
    2009-12-27 qruso Attached File- Added FreeControl_0.0.3.tar.gz, #19377
    2009-12-26 qruso Attached File- Added FreeControl_0.0.2.tar.gz, #19369
    2009-12-23 marioxcc StatusNone In Progress
        Assigned toNone marioxcc

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-02a9.
    Corresponding source code