Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

Selling REBOL scripts

 [1/17] from: g::santilli::tiscalinet::it at: 7-Jan-2002 21:31


Hello [SunandaDH--aol--com]! On 07-Gen-02, you wrote: S> either of those. And here's a third that could help us small S> developers. We submit code to RT for "encapping" and sale. If S> they like the code, they'll "encap" it and offer it for S> paid-download from their site. They take a cut, the Rebol S> world gets a new tool, and you get some money from it! That makes me think, anyone could do that, not only RT! Someone just buys /Encap, puts up a site and start accepting scripts. 10% of the sale goes to RT, say 5% to the site and the rest to the developer. (Well, things aren't so easy, probably, but it can be done.) S> Where's the downside? You can't sell libraries that way. However libraries could use a different model... Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[giesse--writeme--com]> - Amigan - REBOL programmer Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila -- http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/

 [2/17] from: ryanc:iesco-dms at: 7-Jan-2002 16:05


You might want to talk to RT about this one, as I understand the agreement with encap pretty much rules that out. Though I am sure if RT was'nt planning on doing it themselves, they would be willing to negotiate an agreement for that purpose. --Ryan Gabriele Santilli wrote:
> Hello [SunandaDH--aol--com]! > On 07-Gen-02, you wrote:
<<quoted lines omitted: 20>>
> [rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes.
-- Ryan Cole Programmer Analyst www.iesco-dms.com 707-468-5400 The contradiction so puzzling to the ordinary way of thinking comes from the fact that we have to use language to communicate our inner experience which in its very nature transcends lingistics. -D.T. Suzuki

 [3/17] from: sunandadh:aol at: 7-Jan-2002 19:03


Hi Gabrielle,
> S> either of those. And here's a third that could help us small > S> developers. We submit code to RT for "encapping" and sale. If
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
> developer. (Well, things aren't so easy, probably, but it can be > done.)
I've not used or evaluated Encap so I was a little hazy about how it works. Which is why I kept writing "encapped" to show I was just analogising. For your idea to work, several separately distributed Encap applications would have to be able to work with each other and non-encapped code. That way my code (clear source) could call your encapped applications that I've bought. Does anyone know if encap works that way? Or if it is (as I'd assumed) monolithic: one encapped application being a world on its own. (Thinking allowed here again, even encap application are monolithic, we could organise intercommunication via Rugby) Sunanda.

 [4/17] from: ammonjohnson::yahoo at: 7-Jan-2002 20:02


A little hazy on just what Encap does myself, but I have read the agreeement, & it states that you will not allow your Encapped App to execute scripts. HTH Ammon [SunandaDH--aol--com] wrote:

 [5/17] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 8-Jan-2002 6:11


Ammon Johnson wrote:
> A little hazy on just what Encap does myself, but I have read the > agreeement, & it states that you will not allow your Encapped App to > execute scripts.
I don't want to sound negative, but what do you need Encap for? Noone will use your script in enterprise if license doesn't allow it. So - what is Encap good for? And after all - you need something to sell. I remember Maarten suggesting forming Rebol e-biz suite. So far, there is very few things which can be actually sold - Rugby, MySQL protocol, XML stuff from Gavin, XML-RPC and maybe a little more. Now go and look at PHP or Python libraries, look what comes for free and shake your ideas once again. Am I dreaming or what? We have few solutions which we can offer Rebol users to replace their Perl/Python/PHP/etc. stuff with, yet you folks think of how to make money of it? I think that that way, we will not really make it .... But if you ask me, if I would be willing to pay, I say - yes, I am crazy enough to spend some money here. If the money is needed to encourage ppl to write scripts, let's just create some system and vote. I will donate: 20USD for PostGressSQL protocol 10 USD for Fast-CGI protocol, both implemented in Rebol level (something along 10USD for faster, bugfree, native library bindings ...) 50 USD for compliant XML, SOAP, UDDI thing. ... maybe I will not even use above features, but potential Rebol e-biz suite would sound much stronger .... ... call me a fanatic now ;-) But now even RT can think of average 100 USD for /Command update * number-of-Commands-sold, and contract someone to do the stuff ... -pekr-

 [6/17] from: carl:cybercraft at: 8-Jan-2002 21:16


On 08-Jan-02, Gabriele Santilli wrote:
> Hello [SunandaDH--aol--com]! > On 07-Gen-02, you wrote:
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
>> paid-download from their site. They take a cut, the Rebol >> world gets a new tool, and you get some money from it!
The REBOL/Morpheous thing will require lots of Reblets and I doubt even the ones you pay for will be encapped. (Just a guess.) Can we assume that once that gets up and running there'll be a consumer market for REBOL scripts?
> That makes me think, anyone could do that, not only RT! Someone > just buys /Encap, puts up a site and start accepting scripts. 10%
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
> Regards, > Gabriele.
-- Carl Read

 [7/17] from: reichart:prolific at: 8-Jan-2002 3:28


1. Q: Petr Krenzelok wrote: I don't want to sound negative, but what do you need Encap for? Noone will use your script in enterprise if license doesn't allow it. So - what is Encap good for? A: It was a little difficult for me to follow your line of logic, or what you were trying to state. So I won't make any assumptions about what you are stating. What I will do is state that my goal is to make powerful tools that are written in a modular form such that multiple tools can share a common base of source. That a single program can run on multiple platforms. That the programs are small, easy to use, and always being improved, to meet demand and interest. Rebol happens to provide this power. Perl, PHP, and Python (Java for that matter) do not. I don't know how many people here have written 600K lines of Java, but our company has. I have little interest in Java...ever again. Currently we are pre-beta testing an app that was written on the PC in Rebol. It is encapsulated for Linux and Windows (NT, 2000, 98, XP). So far it has run on everything we have tested it on. Including about 10 different flavours of Linux. What Rebol has permitted us to do is not care what the flavour is, but just code. Our final product is still a Rebol app. But only this group will know that. Most people will not care, and that is great to me. We have a full application that including the full Rebol program (with view) is less than 500K! It comes in the form of an EXE (on Windows) and what ever you like to name an Exe on Mac, Linux, etc. Eventually there will be easier ways to release the product in a compressed and encrypted ".r" format as well. So we can put something out in the 20K range, that matches the power of 2 and 8 meg apps. Oh, did I mention the other goal is to SELL this project, for money, and stuff... :) Reichart... Care [Reichart--Prolific--com] to contact me. www.SereneScreen.com for an amazing product. www.Prolific.com to see what is happening in my life.

 [8/17] from: brett:codeconscious at: 8-Jan-2002 22:58


Hi Reichart,
> What I will do is state that my goal is to make powerful tools that are > written in a modular form such that multiple tools can share a common base > of source. That a single program can run on multiple platforms. That the > programs are small, easy to use, and always being improved, to meet demand > and interest.
I'm curious what techniques, idioms, conventions, etc have you used towards attaining such goals - particularly in reference to modularity? Anything you can share for the betterment of all Rebol developers? Thanks, Brett.

 [9/17] from: sunandadh:aol at: 8-Jan-2002 10:12


Hi Petr,
> I don't want to sound negative, but what do you need Encap for? Noone will > use your > script in enterprise if license doesn't allow it. So - what is Encap good > for?
I don't want Encap as such. I want the ability to distribute scripts in a secure way. By which I mean copy protected and tamper proof. If I distribute scripts now, anyone could copy them to anyone else; and anyone could change them. In lots of instances both those abilities are ideals and not handicaps. And I have given away scripts for free, and will continue to do so. But I need the freedom to do otherwise on occasion. I do not want to be called at 3 in the morning and told "Your system is broken. All we did was change some colors in the source and now it says 'Syntax Error: Missing ] at end-of-script'. Come in and fix it NOW!!". Also, if I have sold someone say 5 licences for a product, I want to make reasonably sure that they are not overly abusing that limit. And again, if part of my code is some sort of security routine, I do not want that source exposed to anyone. I've gone to some efforts to ensure my scripts are relatively tamper proof, including a bit of obsfucation and some checksumming. But it'd be nice to have a standard "core" way of distributing such scripts. Encap isn't that way. The licensing is too restrictive (as I understand it), and buying Encap is too expensive for what I want to do. So, for all these reasons, I'd like to see some mechanism within Rebol for the secure distribution of scripts. Encap is almost it. So, as I write before, if RT can tweak Encap to meet the needs of the market, the rebolution could come earlier. Sunanda.

 [10/17] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 8-Jan-2002 16:08


Reichart wrote:
> 1. Q: Petr Krenzelok wrote: I don't want to sound negative, but what do you > need Encap for? Noone will use your script in enterprise if license doesn't > allow it. So - what is Encap good for? > A: It was a little difficult for me to follow your line of logic, or what > you were trying to state. So I won't make any assumptions about what you > are stating.
Eh, difficult to read even for me now - but - the basic idea was, that even if some kind of script comes in its source code version, and it contains some license info, you have to agree to such license provided. You can of course use it against the license, but I think that in enterprise area noone would do it, while providing source code could be even vital to your product. ... Encapping doesn't necessarily save you from pirating :-) -pekr-

 [11/17] from: slok00:yah:oo at: 8-Jan-2002 23:40


At 10:12 AM 1/8/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>I don't want Encap as such. I want the ability to distribute scripts in a >secure way. By which I mean copy protected and tamper proof. > ><snip>.. > >Also, if I have sold someone say 5 licences for a product, I want to make >reasonably sure that they are not overly abusing that limit.
actually, I hope Encap can also do what copy protection software does.. (eg. Preview) - license monitoring (eg. good for 5 license) - time bomb (eg. good for 30 days for evaluation) - time out (eg. expire on Feb 14 2002) as I understand, this will probably requires some form of detection of the various system information to make a binding of the program to that particular machine. Is it something that RT can addon easily ? YekSoon

 [12/17] from: ddalley:idirect at: 8-Jan-2002 12:44


Hello, Sunanda: ----- Original Message ----- From: <[SunandaDH--aol--com]> To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:12 AM Subject: [REBOL] Re: Selling REBOL scripts
> I want the ability to distribute scripts in a > secure way. By which I mean copy protected and tamper proof. > > If I distribute scripts now, anyone could copy them to anyone else; and > anyone could change them. > > In lots of instances both those abilities are ideals and not handicaps.
And
> I have given away scripts for free, and will continue to do so. > > But I need the freedom to do otherwise on occasion. > So, for all these reasons, I'd like to see some mechanism within Rebol for > the secure distribution of scripts. Encap is almost it. So, as I write > before, if RT can tweak Encap to meet the needs of the market, the
rebolution
> could come earlier.
I agree with your reasons for wanting secure program releases completely! I go through the same problem with my ARexx work, which I do sell. I write programs that deal with other people's money, so I feel I >need< security, for, at least, some of my work. We are not asking for the world, here, just a way of either protecting or securing our work, with a modicum of reliability. COMAL 2.0 did this with ease, back in the mid-80's, with scripting programs! They had an open challenge for anyone to break any encrypted COMAL program; no-one succeeded, AFAIK. Why can't REBOL/Core do something similar today? I would put much more effort into releasing many more REBOL and ARexx programs, if only their environments were more secure. I even tried to arrange buying the only ARexx compiler, so that I could release it as free, open software, but the author wasn't reasonable about it. If I understand correctly, REBOL programs would be difficult to compile, and compiling for speed really isn't much of a concern, today. I apologise for all of these "I"s, but this is personal. Donald Dalley

 [13/17] from: g:santilli:tiscalinet:it at: 8-Jan-2002 21:10


Hello [SunandaDH--aol--com]! On 08-Gen-02, you wrote: S> Does anyone know if encap works that way? Or if it is (as I'd S> assumed) monolithic: one encapped application being a world on S> its own. Yes, /Encap lets you create an executable which encapsulates your script and the interpreter to run it. This is useful for complete applications only. Anyway, if there's interest in a site that offers such a service (i.e. encapsulates your script and sells it taking some percent on the sell), I think the company I'm working with might want to create it. S> (Thinking allowed here again, even encap application are S> monolithic, we could organise intercommunication via Rugby) Well, of course, but that's not always the best solution... Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[giesse--writeme--com]> - Amigan - REBOL programmer Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila -- http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/

 [14/17] from: g:santilli:tiscalinet:it at: 8-Jan-2002 21:15


Hello Ryan! On 08-Gen-02, you wrote: RC> You might want to talk to RT about this one, as I understand RC> the agreement with encap pretty much rules that out. Though I RC> am sure if RT was'nt planning on doing it themselves, they RC> would be willing to negotiate an agreement for that purpose. I'll re-read the agreement, but I think that as long as RT takes its 10% on the sell and the encapped application does not expose the REBOL API, it's fine. Anyway, of course RT will have the final word on this... Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[giesse--writeme--com]> - Amigan - REBOL programmer Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila -- http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/

 [15/17] from: reichart:prolific at: 8-Jan-2002 19:04


1. Q: PETR WROTE: Eh, difficult to read even for me now A: That is funny :) 2. Q: BRETT WROTE: I'm curious what techniques, idioms, conventions, etc have you used towards attaining such goals - particularly in reference to modularity? Anything you can share for the betterment of all Rebol developers? A: Sure. The most important thing is to consider the breadth or scope of a routine. But before I start let me note that I will be using Pseudo code (not Rebol) for my examples). Consider a routine from a graphics package that renders a circle: Circle(x,y,r) Where xy are coords, and r is the radius. The screen cords are assumed and are taken from some global define or data statement. This function is "closed" and after written is actually useless. However, image the same function as: Data = Circle(x,y,r) Where the Circle function is not designed to render, but rather to spew out data. Data would now read something like: 123,10 124,11 125,11 126,12 etc. Now you could do plot( circle(x,y,r) ) This is better way to write code (could be a little slower), but allows for some amazing tricks. As an example. Image grabing every other data term to created a dotted line. Or feeding the output to the input of the next xy, to create spirals. You get the idea. Currently we are writing an FTP client. An FTP client shares something like 90% of its functionality with a general File Manager. It also shares a different 90% with a peer to peer or peer to server file sharing util (like Napster). All three of these apps are a great front end for batch building and for system maintenance, such as a util that looks for viruses, or does a Grep, or does archiving. Or consider a util that keeps an eye on your system, and tells you when files are accessed or changed. Or when a directory gets full. Or something that cleans cookies. These are all brothers, or at the very furthest kissing cousins. So here are several key high level functions we are trying to I.D. early on in our software development, that can be used by other apps (that we create): Drag and drop (a file, or selected files from window to window, and once implemented by RT, from Rebol/App to Local/App). Search down directory building file list with all details (file creation date, size, checksum, etc.) Password protect user's settings, and allow settings to be stored or retrieved from a website, or FTP site (this is a cool one, where you can set things up the way you like it, and have those same settings at work and home). We try to think of the part of the program as reusable, and we are looking for ways to build our library more intelligently. Most of this is just discipline, and focus, with a good dose of architecture. Back to the original issue. I want to do my best to protect our hard work. This is why I want to encap. If someone is smart enough to steal our code, cool. Maybe they will come work with us one day :) I met two of my team members at Pirate meetings. One has been with my company for 14.5 years! The other on a Pirate BBS, he has been here for 15 years. None of us pirate though. I used to go to these meetings...to find programmers! People who don't buy software don't buy software. Reichart... Care [Reichart--Prolific--com] to contact me. www.SereneScreen.com for an amazing product. www.Prolific.com to see what is happening in my life.

 [16/17] from: brett:codeconscious at: 10-Jan-2002 18:13


Hi Reichart,
> A: Sure. The most important thing is to consider the breadth or scope of
a
> routine.
Thanks for your response. It helps in my on-going effort to un-fetter my Rebol expressions from older programming constructs. :) Brett.

 [17/17] from: ptretter:charter at: 13-Jan-2002 20:11


You will be able to sell your scripts eventually. I intended to buy scripts for resale but only under my exclusive rights. That is - I buy into the REBOL Royalty agreement and purchase/distribute scripts with my exclusive rights to the software. The only reason I never purchased Encap was that I could not get ALL the clear answers to my questions regarding the agreement and regarding ENCAP. I have looked at the REBOL Royalty agreement - anyone can purchase the agreement and purchase scripts for further sale. However, RT wants 10 percent of all gross profits from the sales. Furthermore, RT has an accounting practice tied up with the agreement that is not corporate friendly. Currently, I'm waiting to see if RT amends the agreement to make it more Reseller friendly and how IOS will impact that agreement. I have yet to hear any further developments on that front - that might be due to the continued development of IOS. Paul Tretter

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted