A PropEr announcement

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
57 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A PropEr announcement

Kostis Sagonas-2
We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a
QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.

The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and
tutorials for PropEr.  It can be accessed at:

        http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/

Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be
very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we
may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.

Enjoy!

Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Edmond Begumisa
Thank you, thank you, thank you!

The tutorials are pure gold.

It takes a little getting used to, but PropEr is a wonderful tool, even  
for someone new to automated testing.

- Edmond -


On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:38 +1000, Kostis Sagonas <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a  
> QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.
>
> The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and  
> tutorials for PropEr.  It can be accessed at:
>
> http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/
>
> Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be  
> very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we  
> may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

James Churchman
Amazing news for those who's projects fall below the radar of needing commercial support but really want to test their code to destruction, as we all should! Will lightly improve the standard of all erlang code out in the wild!

James



ps :
One majorly nit-pciky thing... its more a personal hate than anything else.. I love the "Shirt & Tie with the erlang badge on it" logo, really fantastic.. less keen on the text as an image. On anything but the default zoom setting it looks blurry and you see lots of double anti-aliasing.. as the FontFace stuff is not yet widely supported best technique is to have a div with a background image of both a jpg/gif and an svg as well, any browsers that support svg will pick it up and all others get the jpg like ;

#title_image_div
{
    background-image:  url('images/logo.jpg');
    background-image:  none,url('images/logo.svg'), url('images/logo.jpg');
}

On 12 Jun 2011, at 14:44, Edmond Begumisa wrote:

> Thank you, thank you, thank you!
>
> The tutorials are pure gold.
>
> It takes a little getting used to, but PropEr is a wonderful tool, even for someone new to automated testing.
>
> - Edmond -
>
>
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:38 +1000, Kostis Sagonas <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.
>>
>> The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and tutorials for PropEr.  It can be accessed at:
>>
>> http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/
>>
>> Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>> Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

James Churchman
yes with out the font that you like in unsupporting browsers, so it looks totally different in them :-) using SVG you get pixel perfect rendering from a vector with an image fallback, which is more suitable for logo's etc... like the one in question :-)



On 12 Jun 2011, at 19:00, Dale Harvey wrote:

@fontface is very well supported and falls back gracefully, which image replacement does not.

On 12 Jun 2011 16:06, "James Churchman" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Amazing news for those who's projects fall below the radar of needing commercial support but really want to test their code to destruction, as we all should! Will lightly improve the standard of all erlang code out in the wild!
>
> James
>
>
>
> ps :
> One majorly nit-pciky thing... its more a personal hate than anything else.. I love the "Shirt & Tie with the erlang badge on it" logo, really fantastic.. less keen on the text as an image. On anything but the default zoom setting it looks blurry and you see lots of double anti-aliasing.. as the FontFace stuff is not yet widely supported best technique is to have a div with a background image of both a jpg/gif and an svg as well, any browsers that support svg will pick it up and all others get the jpg like ;
>
> #title_image_div
> {
> background-image: url('images/logo.jpg');
> background-image: none,url('images/logo.svg'), url('images/logo.jpg');
> }
>
> On 12 Jun 2011, at 14:44, Edmond Begumisa wrote:
>
>> Thank you, thank you, thank you!
>>
>> The tutorials are pure gold.
>>
>> It takes a little getting used to, but PropEr is a wonderful tool, even for someone new to automated testing.
>>
>> - Edmond -
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:38 +1000, Kostis Sagonas <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.
>>>
>>> The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and tutorials for PropEr. It can be accessed at:
>>>
>>> http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/
>>>
>>> Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>>
>>> Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>>
>> --
>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

James Churchman
( actually im wrong, it is widely supported, but requires a different font format for every browser and renders very poorly in IE at larger font sizes... http://blog.themeforest.net/tutorials/how-to-achieve-cross-browser-font-face-support/ )

On 12 Jun 2011, at 19:16, James Churchman wrote:

yes with out the font that you like in unsupporting browsers, so it looks totally different in them :-) using SVG you get pixel perfect rendering from a vector with an image fallback, which is more suitable for logo's etc... like the one in question :-)



On 12 Jun 2011, at 19:00, Dale Harvey wrote:

@fontface is very well supported and falls back gracefully, which image replacement does not.

On 12 Jun 2011 16:06, "James Churchman" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Amazing news for those who's projects fall below the radar of needing commercial support but really want to test their code to destruction, as we all should! Will lightly improve the standard of all erlang code out in the wild!
>
> James
>
>
>
> ps :
> One majorly nit-pciky thing... its more a personal hate than anything else.. I love the "Shirt & Tie with the erlang badge on it" logo, really fantastic.. less keen on the text as an image. On anything but the default zoom setting it looks blurry and you see lots of double anti-aliasing.. as the FontFace stuff is not yet widely supported best technique is to have a div with a background image of both a jpg/gif and an svg as well, any browsers that support svg will pick it up and all others get the jpg like ;
>
> #title_image_div
> {
> background-image: url('images/logo.jpg');
> background-image: none,url('images/logo.svg'), url('images/logo.jpg');
> }
>
> On 12 Jun 2011, at 14:44, Edmond Begumisa wrote:
>
>> Thank you, thank you, thank you!
>>
>> The tutorials are pure gold.
>>
>> It takes a little getting used to, but PropEr is a wonderful tool, even for someone new to automated testing.
>>
>> - Edmond -
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:38 +1000, Kostis Sagonas <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.
>>>
>>> The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and tutorials for PropEr. It can be accessed at:
>>>
>>> http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/
>>>
>>> Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>>
>>> Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>>
>> --
>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Francis Joanis
In reply to this post by Kostis Sagonas-2
Hi,

Thanks a lot for the release :)

I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself: since it is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests themselves and to some extent the application under test GPL as well?

I'm obviously not a lawyer, but I'd like to know whether it would be possible to test commercial code using PropEr given its GPL licensing?

Thanks again,
Francis

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Kostis Sagonas <[hidden email]> wrote:
We are happy to announce the first official public release of PropEr, a QuickCheck-inspired Property-Based Testing Tool for Erlang.

The release comes with a proper site containing a User Guide, tips and tutorials for PropEr.  It can be accessed at:

       http://proper.softlab.ntua.gr/

Among other things, it has a proper contact address on which we will be very happy to receive comments and feedback. Depending on interest, we may also set up a mailing list for PropEr users.

Enjoy!

Kostis Sagonas (on behalf of the PropEr developers)
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Vik Olliver
On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>
> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself: since it
> is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests themselves and to
> some extent the application under test GPL as well?

Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself, you
don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.

Vik :v)
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Francis Joanis
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Vik Olliver <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself, you
> don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>

Thanks, that makes sense.

Francis
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Ulf Wiger
In reply to this post by Vik Olliver
On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:

> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>>
>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself: since it
>> is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests themselves and to
>> some extent the application under test GPL as well?
>
> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself, you
> don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.


This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool, people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it requires them to convert to GPL.

Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.

BR,
Ulf W


Ulf Wiger, CTO, Erlang Solutions, Ltd.
http://erlang-solutions.com



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Zabrane Mickael
+1 to try to convince Kostis to release PropEr with a better license!

Please vote!

Regards,
Zabrane


Le 14 juin 2011 à 14:02, Ulf Wiger a écrit :

> On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:
>
>> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>>>
>>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself: since it
>>> is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests themselves and to
>>> some extent the application under test GPL as well?
>>
>> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself, you
>> don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>
>
> This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool, people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it requires them to convert to GPL.
>
> Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.
>
> BR,
> Ulf W
>


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Richard Carlsson-3
In reply to this post by Ulf Wiger
On 06/14/2011 02:02 PM, Ulf Wiger wrote:

> On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:
>> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself:
>>> since it is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests
>>> themselves and to some extent the application under test GPL as
>>> well?
>>
>> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself,
>> you don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>
> This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen
> with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to
> publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very
> helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool,
> people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it
> requires them to convert to GPL.
>
> Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I
> could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.
>
> BR, Ulf W

As I have remarked before on this list, I believe the normal GPL (all
versions) cannot be used for Erlang modules, because the dynamic loading
and linking of classes/modules at runtime is not considered to be any
different from static linking - at least according to the FSF.

The standard Erlang library modules and the runtime system BIFs are
published under the Erlang Public License, which is an even more
restrictive variant of MPL. The MPL is not compatible with GPL
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License#Compatibility_with_GPL),
due to some of its restrictions, so it should follow that the EPL is
also not compatible.

If you want to enforce copyleft in your code, but not force it on other
libraries that link with your code, you can use LGPL instead of GPL.
(Preferably, use v3, which is compatible with Apache License 2.)

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html

     /Richard (not a lawyer)
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Eric Merritt-2

I talked with Kostis about this at the erlang factory. He said he is going to provide the exception to the gpl for open source projects. I think he just has not had time to do the actual work.

On Jun 14, 2011 7:26 AM, "Richard Carlsson" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 02:02 PM, Ulf Wiger wrote:
>> On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:
>>> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>>>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself:
>>>> since it is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests
>>>> themselves and to some extent the application under test GPL as
>>>> well?
>>>
>>> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself,
>>> you don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>>
>> This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen
>> with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to
>> publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very
>> helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool,
>> people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it
>> requires them to convert to GPL.
>>
>> Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I
>> could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.
>>
>> BR, Ulf W
>
> As I have remarked before on this list, I believe the normal GPL (all
> versions) cannot be used for Erlang modules, because the dynamic loading
> and linking of classes/modules at runtime is not considered to be any
> different from static linking - at least according to the FSF.
>
> The standard Erlang library modules and the runtime system BIFs are
> published under the Erlang Public License, which is an even more
> restrictive variant of MPL. The MPL is not compatible with GPL
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License#Compatibility_with_GPL),
> due to some of its restrictions, so it should follow that the EPL is
> also not compatible.
>
> If you want to enforce copyleft in your code, but not force it on other
> libraries that link with your code, you can use LGPL instead of GPL.
> (Preferably, use v3, which is compatible with Apache License 2.)
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html
>
> /Richard (not a lawyer)
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

James Churchman
Could the lgpl not be chosen instead? Would this not allow the tests to be distributed along as they don't ship a custom version of propEr as somebody else states?
Also is it really the case that the tests could not be distributed, or more a case that it is totally fine to distribute the tests along as the person receiving the tests downloads proper themselves? the code that is not tests would still run fine.

Also what was the original reasoning behind choosing the gpl in this case? 

Regards

James


also +1 to try to convince Kostis to release PropEr with a better license!

On 14 Jun 2011, at 13:33, Eric Merritt wrote:

I talked with Kostis about this at the erlang factory. He said he is going to provide the exception to the gpl for open source projects. I think he just has not had time to do the actual work.

On Jun 14, 2011 7:26 AM, "Richard Carlsson" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 02:02 PM, Ulf Wiger wrote:
>> On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:
>>> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>>>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself:
>>>> since it is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests
>>>> themselves and to some extent the application under test GPL as
>>>> well?
>>>
>>> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself,
>>> you don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>>
>> This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen
>> with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to
>> publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very
>> helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool,
>> people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it
>> requires them to convert to GPL.
>>
>> Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I
>> could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.
>>
>> BR, Ulf W
>
> As I have remarked before on this list, I believe the normal GPL (all
> versions) cannot be used for Erlang modules, because the dynamic loading
> and linking of classes/modules at runtime is not considered to be any
> different from static linking - at least according to the FSF.
>
> The standard Erlang library modules and the runtime system BIFs are
> published under the Erlang Public License, which is an even more
> restrictive variant of MPL. The MPL is not compatible with GPL
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License#Compatibility_with_GPL),
> due to some of its restrictions, so it should follow that the EPL is
> also not compatible.
>
> If you want to enforce copyleft in your code, but not force it on other
> libraries that link with your code, you can use LGPL instead of GPL.
> (Preferably, use v3, which is compatible with Apache License 2.)
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html
>
> /Richard (not a lawyer)
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Francis Joanis
+1 as well for me.

Even if it is a far fetched use case, I can imagine a customer wanting
to request a copy of the "test suite" (i.e. including PropEr based
tests) of a commercial product.

Thanks,
Francis
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Jared Morrow
At a very minimum, the LGPL was invented for cases exactly like these.   So +1 to at least moving it to LGPL if something like Apache, BSD, or MIT isn't wanted.

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Francis Joanis <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 as well for me.

Even if it is a far fetched use case, I can imagine a customer wanting
to request a copy of the "test suite" (i.e. including PropEr based
tests) of a commercial product.

Thanks,
Francis
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Richard Carlsson-3
In reply to this post by Richard Carlsson-3
On 2011-06-14 19:50, Daniel Luna wrote:
> The GNU GPL has always allowed for linking with "system libraries" and
> in version 3 that now explicitly includes the standard libraries of
> common programming libraries.
 >
 > So I don't know whether older versions of GPL are incompatible with
 > Erlang or not, but it seems clear cut that version 3 is.

GPL v2 talks rather specifically about only "the major components
(compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the
executable runs", which does not seem to cover things like runtime
libraries of a language implementation apart from the language the OS is
written in. You're right that v3 seems to be much more "modern" in this
regard, so the libraries and runtime system of the Erlang/OTP standard
distribution are probably not a problem under GPL v3.

Still, any other software (i.e., your tests) specifically designed to
depend on PropEr as currently published under the GPL would itself have
to be offered under the terms of the GPL.

> Generally I would not recommend LGPL, but would rather recommend that
> Kostis dual licenses the software. Most (if not all) users would be
> fine with GPL. The few that really, really want to give the tests to
> their clients without also giving away the source code, could then
> purchase a closed source version of the software.

There are many open source projects that wish to include their test code
as part of their distribution, both because it's easier not to strip
them out, and because their users may want to run the tests. If they
want to distribute their main code offering under a non-copyleft license
like MIT or Apache - it's their choice - they could only do that by
splitting the code into one non-copyleft distribution without the tests
and one GPL-compatible distribution with the tests. That's asking quite
a lot of your poor users.

Test frameworks are simply a bit different from other library code, and
I think the licensing should reflect this. But that's all down to Kostis
and Manolis to decide, of course.

     /Richard
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

OvermindDL1
In reply to this post by James Churchman

Ditto, GPL is completely incompatible with the (non-fsf) open licenses of things I use.  LGPL would work, but with the GPL I would never be able to use PropEr.

On Jun 14, 2011 8:13 AM, "James Churchman" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Could the lgpl not be chosen instead? Would this not allow the tests to be distributed along as they don't ship a custom version of propEr as somebody else states?
> Also is it really the case that the tests could not be distributed, or more a case that it is totally fine to distribute the tests along as the person receiving the tests downloads proper themselves? the code that is not tests would still run fine.
>
> Also what was the original reasoning behind choosing the gpl in this case?
>
> Regards
>
> James
>
>
> also +1 to try to convince Kostis to release PropEr with a better license!
>
> On 14 Jun 2011, at 13:33, Eric Merritt wrote:
>
>> I talked with Kostis about this at the erlang factory. He said he is going to provide the exception to the gpl for open source projects. I think he just has not had time to do the actual work.
>>
>> On Jun 14, 2011 7:26 AM, "Richard Carlsson" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On 06/14/2011 02:02 PM, Ulf Wiger wrote:
>> >> On 14 Jun 2011, at 01:09, Vik Olliver wrote:
>> >>> On 14/06/11 11:01, Francis Joanis wrote:
>> >>>> I have a question about the GPL licensing of the tool itself:
>> >>>> since it is GPL, doesn't it require to make the written tests
>> >>>> themselves and to some extent the application under test GPL as
>> >>>> well?
>> >>>
>> >>> Only if you distribute the tests. If you keep them to yourself,
>> >>> you don't owe anyone anything. The GPL respects privacy.
>> >>
>> >> This could become an obstacle to adoption similar to what's been seen
>> >> with Quviq QuickCheck: people who have Open Source projects need to
>> >> publish (=distribute) test suites as well. Just as it's not very
>> >> helpful to distribute test suites that require an expensive tool,
>> >> people might be reluctant to publish PropEr-based tests if it
>> >> requires them to convert to GPL.
>> >>
>> >> Kostis did say that they would make an exception for OSS projects. I
>> >> could not find any such exception when quickly scanning the repos.
>> >>
>> >> BR, Ulf W
>> >
>> > As I have remarked before on this list, I believe the normal GPL (all
>> > versions) cannot be used for Erlang modules, because the dynamic loading
>> > and linking of classes/modules at runtime is not considered to be any
>> > different from static linking - at least according to the FSF.
>> >
>> > The standard Erlang library modules and the runtime system BIFs are
>> > published under the Erlang Public License, which is an even more
>> > restrictive variant of MPL. The MPL is not compatible with GPL
>> > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License#Compatibility_with_GPL),
>> > due to some of its restrictions, so it should follow that the EPL is
>> > also not compatible.
>> >
>> > If you want to enforce copyleft in your code, but not force it on other
>> > libraries that link with your code, you can use LGPL instead of GPL.
>> > (Preferably, use v3, which is compatible with Apache License 2.)
>> >
>> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html
>> >
>> > /Richard (not a lawyer)
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > erlang-questions mailing list
>> > [hidden email]
>> > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Frédéric Trottier-Hébert
In reply to this post by James Churchman
I'm wondering about this myself. If I only provide the tests (including the -include_lib line) but not the PropEr code
itself, is it breaking the license? Technically, none of the PropEr code is running in there, only its API.

--
Fred Hébert
http://www.erlang-solutions.com



On 2011-06-14, at 10:13 AM, James Churchman wrote:

> Also is it really the case that the tests could not be distributed, or more a case that it is totally fine to distribute the tests along as the person receiving the tests downloads proper themselves? the code that is not tests would still run fine.
>
> Regards
>
> James
>
>
> also +1 to try to convince Kostis to release PropEr with a better license!

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Torben Hoffmann
I am afraid that the GPLv3 is contaminating in this case - I have spent some time reading the license and how to interpret it and I also asked around, so I do not think you can ship PropEr test code with your product without becoming GPLv3. At least I personally would not run that risk.

Note that if you are using PropEr internally and you are not shipping the test source or beams you are free to use PropEr to test your code. But if you ship then your code becomes GPLv3 (as I read the thing).

However, as Eric mentioned earlier, the PropEr team is looking into adding a FOSS License Exception and now that the big v1.0 is behind them they hopefully get the time need to investigate this and see if it is possible to do.

The PropEr team has been very approachable about this issue so I think we should just wait for them to find the time it takes to get this done right.

With a FOSS License Exception there will be no issues and it will open the doors for PropEr to prosper for Open Source Erlang projects.

If you want to work with PropEr and receive some guidance from a semi-veteran (me) you can join us on the Erlware team where we are working on property based tests for the erlware-commons and gradually adding them where it makes sense.

Cheers,
Torben

2011/6/15 Frédéric Trottier-Hébert <[hidden email]>
I'm wondering about this myself. If I only provide the tests (including the -include_lib line) but not the PropEr code
itself, is it breaking the license? Technically, none of the PropEr code is running in there, only its API.

--
Fred Hébert
http://www.erlang-solutions.com



On 2011-06-14, at 10:13 AM, James Churchman wrote:

> Also is it really the case that the tests could not be distributed, or more a case that it is totally fine to distribute the tests along as the person receiving the tests downloads proper themselves? the code that is not tests would still run fine.
>
> Regards
>
> James
>
>
> also +1 to try to convince Kostis to release PropEr with a better license!

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions



--
http://www.linkedin.com/in/torbenhoffmann

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A PropEr announcement

Kostis Sagonas-2
Torben Hoffmann wrote:

> I am afraid that the GPLv3 is contaminating in this case ...
>
> However, as Eric mentioned earlier, the PropEr team is looking into
> adding a FOSS License Exception and now that the big v1.0 is behind them
> they hopefully get the time need to investigate this and see if it is
> possible to do.
>
> The PropEr team has been very approachable about this issue so I think
> we should just wait for them to find the time it takes to get this done
> right.

Thanks for this comment!

We have discussed the issue extensively yesterday and today we wrote a
mail to the Free Software Foundation to also ask their opinion and their
suggestion on how to properly deal with the issues involved.

Quoting from the mail we sent to FSF:

   Our primary concern is that PropEr be as useful as possible to FOSS
   programmers. Therefore, the most important requirement from PropEr's
   license is that it allows FOSS projects (regardless of license) to:

     * use PropEr without restrictions, and especially without needing to
       switch to another license
     * release their testing code under whatever license they choose
     * distribute PropEr freely, to be used as part of the build cycle of
       the project, or for other uses (e.g. if the project in question is
       an Erlang IDE, it could distribute PropEr as a plugin), again
       without needing to switch licenses

   The above benefits need *not* extend to developers of proprietary
   software. If PropEr's license could restrict them in some way, that
   would be an added bonus, but this is not a strict requirement.

   Another requirement is that PropEr's license is a (preferably strong)
   copyleft: we would like to guarantee that any extensions to PropEr are
   also free software.

   // ... We also told them about the issue that the GPL is supposedly
   //     unusable for Erlang programs due to the nature of Erlang.

In short, we are looking for a solution/license that will allow at least
all open-source projects to use PropEr without any restrictions or by
being contaminated by GPL.

I'll be surprised if we do not find a solution, but please bear with us
until we resolve this the proper way.

In the meantime, you can use the software and the proper e-mail address
for questions and comments.

Kostis
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
123