What would be needed to go to a full 1.5.0 release?

[hank]

Finally I begin to wonder if GPL is the best choice for an ambitious project like Celestia... :?

A long list of various open source licenses can be found here. (Warning: be prepared for mind-numbing legalese.) Do you have a preference?

- Hank

[ElChristou]

Finally I begin to wonder if GPL is the best choice for an ambitious project like Celestia...

A long list of various open source licenses can be found here. (Warning: be prepared for mind-numbing legalese.) Do you have a preference?

- Hank

Give me a week... (or more...)

Tx for the link!

[chris]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia. I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

--Chris

[Christophe]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

That's good to hear back from you Chris, and good to know you've been working on Celestia. Can you tell us more about those changes for ESA or are you under some kind of NDA?

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia.

Well, the working of the GPL is not that obvious, especially for people coming from the Windows/Apple world.

I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

Yes, as this thread shows it's more confusing than helpful. It seems that KDE projects use the phrase "The <program> developers" in their copyright notice, we could do the same and use "The Celestia developers" in the readme and about box.

[selden]

Please do not forget that the concept of copyright is not the same as the concept of a license. (The GPL is a license.)

My understanding is that
the copyright owner is the one who gets to determine what license applies. Except for a "work for hire", copyright is effective immediately when a person fixes a "work" in a tangible medium. In other words, when separate writings by multiple people are involved, the copyrights applicable to a program do not apply to the entire body of work as a whole, but rather apply separately to the portions that each individual wrote. But that's just my interpretation.

While the words in Celestia's current notices may not be correct, I would suggest consulting a lawyer before changing any copyright notices. If you think the GPL is complicated, then you have not read any of the copyright laws. Although the Berne Convention has been signed by most countries, they all seem to have felt the need to add their own "clarifications". And, of course, they're all different.

One source of information about copyright is at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Copyright

[ElChristou]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia. I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

THANKS for those few lines!
Same as Christophe, a few more about your project would be cool!

Concerning the license, I'm really wondering now (I begun to read a few from Hank list) if GPL is really adapted to Celestia...
If I'm not wrong, the GPL is not only to share knowledge but to share work. The condition is to keep the result also under GPL.
Now the problem of Celestia is that it's not anymore a simple soft that can be share easily for the benefit of the whole OpenSource Comm just like this, it's a too complex one based on knowledge too specialized (physics, maths) to be share and mod by the first coder out there.

My feeling is that the code should be freely visible (to share knowledge) but not to build upon (or under conditions) to preserve the work that again is not at the glance of the first one.

Now, Celestia should be open enough to welcome all projects interested by it's code, but before any agreement, the topic should be discuss in the Celestia comm to determinate if the necessary knowledge is present. It would be a way to preserve the work that again is really not a classic one...

Again it's only my feeling, but perhaps I'm all wrong and the code is not soo peculiar to deserve a special license...

[selden]

ElChristou,

Unfortunately, you cannot change the license once GPL is being used. That's why it exists: to ensure that the software continues to be available for anyone to use and modify.

[ElChristou]

ElChristou,

Unfortunately, you cannot change the license once GPL is being used. That's why it exists: to ensure that the software continues to be available for anyone to use and modify.

I suppose you are right.
So the only choice is to dev till the perfect and ultimate code and to maintain the community alive during Chris eclipses... what a program!

[hank]

I think the best way to prevent divisive competition and commercial exploitation of Celestia is to provide a high-visibility, commercial-quality, continuously-improving open source version of Celestia that is highly user-configurable and extensible to accommodate a wide variety of user needs and preferences. In other words, deprive the competition of their market. That's easier said than done, of course, but in the long run I think it's the most productive approach.

- Hank

[Bluespace]

***************************************************************************
* Celestia *
* *
* A real-time space simulation that lets you experience our universe in *
* three dimensions.

* Celestia web site:
* http://www.celestiaproject.net/celestia/
* Celestia documentation:
* http://www.celestiaproject.net/celestia/documentation.html
* Celestia forums:
http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/
** Celestia Developers
http://www.celestiaproject.net/devteam
*
Copyright: Chris Laurel
License : GPL

Lead Developers
(Programmers)

Chris Laurel
Clint Weisbrod
Fridger Schrempp
Bob Ippolito
Christophe Teyssier
Hank Ramsey etc.

(Graphics)
ElChristou
Names...... etc.

(Lead Testers)
Names.........

(Additional Scripts & Activities)
Fsgregs

Alternate Versions

Celestia (Fictional) some creators, websites
Celestia (Educational)
Celestia (whatever )

All GPL


Developers Site http://www.celestiaproject.net/devteam



*
******************************************************

Start/release with any older/current Versions's Code as a Basic 1.0 Dev Version
Put it for download

And let the window opened for anyone/everyone to take the code, do whatever they want , provide they too release the code (with the above notice) with their names added (if they want to release their build to the public) (and yes that's GPL ) (peoples will form a cluster, competition cames, and we'll get a highly active, powerful Celestia) ,

Those who steals the codes, sells it well, there's a good celestia member from every part of the world here, so they will go to the stealer , and beat him badly



i think i will be kicked out

[selden]

Bluespace,

I'm confused by your posting. You are exactly describing the current situation. While there's no formal contest, being able to create a new and better version is always possible with open-source code like Celestia. It just requires someone with the time, ambition and knowledge to download the sourcecode and do whatever they want with it.

[ElChristou]

I think the best way to prevent divisive competition and commercial exploitation of Celestia is to provide a high-visibility, commercial-quality, continuously-improving open source version of Celestia that is highly user-configurable and extensible to accommodate a wide variety of user needs and preferences. In other words, deprive the competition of their market. That's easier said than done, of course, but in the long run I think it's the most productive approach.

- Hank

I think so...
...and I also think we will pretty soon have a nice example of important choice to make with Fridger's Cosmo project. Will the Celestia community open it's door to such a project? (see here for details) Or let Fridger fly on his own for a complete new soft? ...to be continued...

[Bluespace]

Bluespace,

I'm confused by your posting. You are exactly describing the current situation. While there's no formal contest, being able to create a new and better version is always possible with open-source code like Celestia. It just requires someone with the time, ambition and knowledge to download the sourcecode and do whatever they want with it.

yeah !!, why i said to put all those categories/person names, is cause if once mentioned, then the readme or the program is not going to be the 1 man thing (as said in above posts), the celestia will become one huge collaborative work (of course, currently it's like that) but spread everywhere)
as small mods, scripts, documents, etc etc.... and thats why it's not going anywhere (of this 6631 members, there will be someone somewhere sleeping, only to be wake up with a electric current) if everything goes under one roof then the current will flow, i am sure

so everything under one roof, code for anyone, others may/or not develop their own, after making one, contribute the code the the "under one roof" if they wish, sometimes, pupil will surpass the master, and the process of learning continues (both by masters and pupils)

in my case at verbots , we build characters, individually, was small, then we all the creators merged the different codes, and it won the 2006 challenge, the Base was my code, and other person added a huge amount, now, we all accept that person as the owner of the final file, no one is going to cry that they want the names pasted on the desc. a few people know what is from where, that's all we want.

We are humans, sometimes, we get selfish, sometimes gentle, sometimes caring, sometimes hatred, but life is short, we only need money to live a general life, do help to the community, mother earth, there's nothing to earn by our name printed on the MOON, but if it does, just take it as a happy moment, no selfishness (Bill Gates hasn't learned that lesson )

wth am i telling, if the post is a crap, plz delete it

[Bluespace]

Also this is not a war over Chris, all the above posts are just a person's way of interpreting the situations, (some saw it's a long time without any new possibilities) (some saw a situation which they can set about blindly on making contributions) (some saw their work is going to go in vein) like that..... i know i am no person to say this just 74 posts, but i like to open my mind, (i don't care if i am in front of bin laden )
but those much posts on a simple GPL, made me to posts this, & the above
what i can see, is there's no initiative for anything they mentioned all are just sitting and saying,(because i can see how the tone of the posts changed by that 1 post by Chris ) (if it was me, then a new Celestia would be here in just some days from the codes,(but i don't know pogramming, what a nice escape) ( i would not sit and wait for the permissions ) (if extreme results in lockup, i'll get food there too) hehe

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz.........................

[MKruer]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia. I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

--Chris

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I think that most of the issue stems from lack of perceived direction flowed by lack of updates. This could be easily solved if you promote someone to a release manager (someone who can release versions while you are absent) and allow people to check in bug fixes (not necessarily new features.) There are a lot of bugs that still can be squashed while you are gone. Granted the fixes may not be as elegant as you would like, but it would be a step in the right direction and more importantly revitalizing the project.

So far I have been using the 1.5.0pre3 and its been fairly stable. I would still like to see all the bugs listed http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_i ... tid=121302 squashed before the final 1.5.0 release, and I believe that it is something that the community as a whole can do while you are away.

So I guess what all this boils down to is the people that can make the changes would like your approval, your blessing to continue on while you are away.

[chris]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

That's good to hear back from you Chris, and good to know you've been working on Celestia. Can you tell us more about those changes for ESA or are you under some kind of NDA?

There's no NDA. I'm working on making Celestia work as the visualization component of an ESA-developed spacecraft trajectory and mission modeling software package. I believe that the plan is to eventually put everything on SourceForge. I'm going to be in the Netherlands for a workshop at the end of the month, and will get some more information there.

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia.

Well, the working of the GPL is not that obvious, especially for people coming from the Windows/Apple world.

I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

Yes, as this thread shows it's more confusing than helpful. It seems that KDE projects use the phrase "The <program> developers" in their copyright notice, we could do the same and use "The Celestia developers" in the readme and about box.[/quote]

Sounds to me like a good model to follow.

--Chris

[Rassilon]

I'm still here, and still working on Celestia. I have been doing some work for ESA, but up to this point I haven't been making major changes to the Celestia code itself as part of that project. And all changes that have been made (as well as all future changes) will of course be open source.

I don't understand this talk of switching licenses--it seems like the GPL gives us what we need and protects the open source nature of Celestia. I admit some ignorance about the meaning of putting my name next to the copyright. Perhaps it's best just to omit it entirely?

--Chris

You better still be here because I can and WILL hunt you down I dont care if your 50 million miles up in space programming the new skylab computer for Celestia or not!!!

[hank]

It seems that KDE projects use the phrase "The <program> developers" in their copyright notice, we could do the same and use "The Celestia developers" in the readme and about box.

Sounds to me like a good model to follow.

--Chris

Sounds good to me, too. Particularly since I'm hopeful that the list of Celestia developers will be growing...

- Hank

[Bluespace]

This is a bullsh*t, no response, community, i'am leaving

Bye

[bh]

Don't get huffy Bluespace... I for one found your posts a little unclear.