[erlang-questions] 0MQ libraries

[Joe Armstrong]

I'm slightly confused here.

I was thinking of implementing http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:23

The text in RFC says

This Specification is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY
or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for
more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public
License along with this program;

The words "with this program" do not make sense - there is no program. Just
a spec of
what you see on the wire. How can I receive a copy of a program when there
is no program?

Then the text is copyrighted and licensed in three different ways.

Do I have to do a darkroom implementation and swear on the bones of my
dearly lamented Aunty Doreen that I have never read the C++ code on the
zero MQ site?

I just want to read the spec and implement it. This is presumably why it
has been published.

RFCs accepted by ISOC are described in

https://www.rfc-editor.org/copyright.23Jan01.html

In their wisdom ISOC do not license RFCs - but they retain a copyright.

I would be very happy to a see a change in the ZMQ RFCs in line with what
ISOC does.

Cheers

/Joe







On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 3:23 PM, james <james@REDACTED> wrote:

> On 31/01/2014 07:12, Joe Armstrong wrote:
>
>> Pieter suggest looking at
>>
>> ...
>>
>> https://github.com/zeromq/libzmq/blob/master/tests/test_stream.cpp
>>
>> These implement the wire-line protocol on top of tcp rather than through
>> the
>> 0mz library so its easier to see whats going on.
>>
>>  Isn't that dangerous if there is a significant difference in the desired
> license?
>
> The zmtp license is more liberal.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140202/248785a9/attachment.htm>