r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[Script Library] REBOL.org: Script library and Mailing list archive

Brett
25-Jun-2005
[71]
Some odds and ends all of which can be found here:

http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_1nr_10/http://proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/*
Anton
25-Jun-2005
[72]
Doesn't look like I have svm.r, sorry.
Brett
25-Jun-2005
[73]
Oh and I have some fx5 styles stored in a backup of an old REBOL/View 
cache that is not on wayback machine.
Anton
25-Jun-2005
[74]
I've got all these in my public cache:
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/fuzzy-k-means.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/html-viewer/html-viewer.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/fx5-menu.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/fx5-request-file.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/fx5-styles-test.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/fx5-styles.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/irc-client.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/morph.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/morph2.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/multi-click.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/rebsearch.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/regedit.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/rsearch.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/REBOL/view-menu-test.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/soft/function-test.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/soft/fuzzy-pats.r
proton.cl-ki.uni-osnabrueck.de/soft/fuzzy-show.r
users.bigpond.net.au/datababies/Anton/rebol/links/index.r
www-lehre.inf.uos.de/~fsievert/rebol/newshow.r
www.sievertsen.de/index.r
www.sievertsen.de/REBOL/REBtroids.r
www.sievertsen.de/REBOL/REBtris/REBtris.r
Allen
25-Jun-2005
[75]
OK. Shall we rebuild his reb and host it somewhere again. I'm will 
to put this all in an fx5 dir on rebolforces. (until Frank surfaces 
again)
Anton
25-Jun-2005
[76]
Good idea. I will email you what I have later,
Allen
25-Jun-2005
[77]
Its alive! Frank-enstein...
Graham
25-Jun-2005
[78x2]
Anyone see his dbridge.r and dbridge.java ?
This appears to be the fx5 home page .. but all the links for the 
plugins are broken.

http://www.dchen.de/
Allen
25-Jun-2005
[80]
OK. Just a quick place holder with the scripts I've got so far http://www.rebolforces.com/fx5/
yeksoon
26-Jul-2005
[81]
does anyone know of any site indexer or search engine script written 
in rebol or available in rebol.org?
Sunanda
26-Jul-2005
[82]
REBOL.org uses an indexer i wrote for another application and adapted 
to the Library. Let me know what you need an indexer for, and I could 
comment on its suitability.

Hallvard must have an indexer too to run Rix: http://www.oops-as.no/rix
Sunanda
8-Aug-2005
[83]
Just trimmed about 100 people from the Library membership list....
http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/cpt-view-users.r


A lot of them were drive-by signups by spammers to get their URL 
a link ("Hi I'm Mandy, click my link for photos") And most of *those* 
must have an IQ hovering aound their waist size because they'd failed 
to click the profile option to make their URL visible to other Library 
members.


So the membership list (claiming 200+ members) is more relevant than 
it was before.


But the automated expiry script may have caught some genuine members. 
If your userid has gone and you want it back, please drop me a private 
message.
Ingo
13-Aug-2005
[84]
If I have a script that is based on some source code from within 
rebol (say, on the desktop code), what's the appropriate license, 
when uploading to rebol.org?
Graham
13-Aug-2005
[85]
REBOL [
	Title: "REBOL/View Desktop - Main Module"
	Version: 1.2.0
	Author: "Carl Sassenrath"

 Rights: "Copyright REBOL Technologies 1999-2005. All rights reserved."

 ; You are free to use, modify, and distribute this software with 
 any

 ; REBOL Technologies products as long as the above header, copyright,

 ; and this comment remain intact. This software is provided "as is"

 ; and without warranties of any kind. In no event shall the owners 
 or

 ; contributors be liable for any damages of any kind, even if advised

 ; of the possibility of such damage. See license for more information.


 ; Please help us to improve this software by contributing changes 
 and
	; fixes via http://www.rebol.com/feedback.html- Thanks!
]
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[86x2]
Well, the library header 'license seems to only accept one of: bsd 
cc-by cc-by-sa gpl lgpl mit pd public-domain rvd 

And it is needed, but noneof these seems to be acceptable ... I guess 
...
It seems you got the source code .... from, no, I just remember, 
it had once been released, right? But I just extracted the
code from a running rebol. I guess this header seems to be right.
Sunanda
14-Aug-2005
[88]
When we added validation for the license field, we limited it to 
licenses that had actually been used by people contributing scripts:
http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/license-help.r


I reckon there are way too many license variants already in the world 
-- it's the bane of the open source movement. (We had a list of over 
40 licenses that people in theory said they'd like to use when contributing 
scripts)

But,. as the note on the page says:

f you'd like to use a license for a contributed script, and you can't 
see it listed above, please send us Feedback.
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[89]
OK, Feedback .... but I dunno what license I'd like to use ... what 
would you call it?
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[90x3]
LPL ?
And note that if you extract the code from a running rebol, you won't 
get the license.  I got the above from the new SDK.
So, that message needs to be included with your script.
Wasn't Carl thinking about a new license at one stage ?
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[93x2]
I seem to remember something like that ... but then ... I do remember 
lots of things said ...
Whatever this meens ;-)
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[95x3]
Now the desktop source has a different license from the rest of rebol 
code.
Hmm.  Perhaps not.
Looks like the sdk has all changed to the above license.
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[98x2]
means, of course
I'm not sure, is the license stated anywhere? I mean, for code extracted 
from the running executable ...
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[100x2]
I don't think so ...
There might be a standard copyright somewhere that says you can't 
reverse engineer ...
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[102]
I got the code from the 1.3.1 executable, so it does not necessarily 
use the same license as the one distributed with the older SDK.
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[103]
But the current SDK license appears to say that it is now possible 
to publish all the sources on say, rebol.org ...
Ingo
14-Aug-2005
[104]
I guess it should be ... there are a lot of patches to the code on 
rebol.org, which maybe we should check the licenses on them.
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[105]
So, time to ask Sunanda if we should now do that.
Sunanda
14-Aug-2005
[106]
I don't know (or care) much about licenses -- generally speaking 
after I've written some code and it's been sold or given away,  I 
never want to see it again.....So I'm not the best person to ask.


Carl did offer the "rebol desktop license" which may be what you 
want. Some info starting here
http://www.rebol.com/news3610.html
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[107]
the question is whether the library can host the sdk sources since 
the license appears to allow that.
JaimeVargas
14-Aug-2005
[108]
I thought the SDK-Sources were proprietary.
Graham
14-Aug-2005
[109x2]
Not any more.
Check the new license in the headers in the beta SDK.
Sunanda
14-Aug-2005
[111]
I guess if Ingo has some code derived from RT's source, the cleanest 
approach would be to ask carl if/how it can be republished.
JaimeVargas
14-Aug-2005
[112]
Wow. They are removing that restriction. I didn't notice. This is 
interesting indeed.
Ingo
15-Aug-2005
[113x3]
Well, IIRC the desktop code had once been released by Carl in the 
hope to get derived versions. So, publishing it _should_ be OK, I 
guess ;-)

But then, as I didn't used the published source (and don't find it 
at the moment), I'm not sure which license would be right.
Yes, Sunanda, I don't care much either, but this isn't my code, at 
least not completely. And though I'd think think that license hassles 
are just a superflouous burden ...

I guess in these times we should pay at least basic attention to 
it.
I don't know what 'lpl should stand for, I had thought about 'rt 
(as being derived from RT sourcecode)
Gregg
22-Aug-2005
[116]
I would call it an 'RT license for now.
Sunanda
7-Sep-2005
[117]
Hey, fun stuff -- REBOL.org just got attacked by some sort of spambot 
trying to generate hundreds of fake signup accounts.
It managed to create 10 before our bot detection kicked in.
They must think we're stupid.
Graham
7-Sep-2005
[118x3]
flood detection?
Time to implement Captcha ?
I presume AGG makes it easier to distort text for a visual Captcha 
...