RE: derived works

["Dalesio, Leo" <dalesio@bnl.gov>]

Title: RE: derived works

Enough --- really.
Michael did not release anything or intend anything.
The issue is not resolved.
The code approach you are talking about here is common in linux already. Did you give them credit in your code? Who is the author on the code you did release?
Nothing was intended. And nothing is resolved.
Please take this offline.




-----Original Message-----
From: tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov on behalf of Jeff Hill
Sent: Fri 8/27/2010 11:39 AM
To: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: derived works

One more important point.

In R3.14 we took the important step of moving all of the OS interface layers
into a
common area in libCom. In contrast, in the past I maintained some of them in
with the
CA client library because the CA client library was the only part of base
that was portable
at that time. The consolidated approach makes porting EPICS to a new OS
easier.

Michael has in his published version of EPICS placed his derived version of
my source code into
libCom. His derived code now occupies exactly the same niche in libCom that
my original version
does in the decapitated CVS trunk.

Note that the Michael's derived version neither currently works correctly
nor makes any
attempt to conform to the interface that my work in the decapitated CVS
trunk requires.
Some people may ask this question; what is the problem with what Michael has
done, he
can maintain his version and Jeff can maintain his version and we can all be
happy. The
problem with that approach is that porting EPICS is now harder because I
would be
forced to maintain private copies of at least some of the OS interface
layers in CA.
Something that I am definitely not in favor of doing.

Sorry about the interruption,

Jeff
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey O. Hill           Email         <mailto:johill@lanl.gov>
johill@lanl.gov
LANL MS H820              Voice        505 665 1831
Los Alamos NM 87545 USA   FAX          505 665 5107

Message content: TSPA

From: tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov [mailto:tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov]
On Behalf Of Jeff Hill
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:41 AM
To: 'Dalesio, Leo'
Cc: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: derived works

Ø  I'll contact my legal department today

I hope that you find this to be constructive.

This is a relatively small piece of code, and with enough effort it is
always possible to
take the concepts and write a completely new code (it really helps to have
the original ideas
and the original source code to look at). Maybe it's even strictly  legal to
take the low road.
I think the wider issue is this; we get to choose, we can work together or
duplicate effort
creating  functionally equivalent codes. Hence my feeling compelled to
consume some
bandwidth to discuss the issue on tech-talk.

Jeff
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey O. Hill           Email         <mailto:johill@lanl.gov>
johill@lanl.gov
LANL MS H820              Voice        505 665 1831
Los Alamos NM 87545 USA   FAX          505 665 5107

Message content: Correspondence

From: Dalesio, Leo [mailto:dalesio@bnl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:04 AM
To: Jeff Hill
Cc: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: derived works



>Point of fact, LANL copyright and my authorship are clearly stated within
>the original
>source code.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Some other points of fact.

Strictly speaking - it is a work that was based on the concepts not copied.
No author was listed - not you nor Michael.
We can have our legal departments discuss the issue.
I'll contact my legal department today. They are very helpful this way.
We'll let you know the results. We will also share them with tech-talk so
that we can all learn the strict legal interpretation of authorship. I think
this is not the first time this has struck a nerve.