A protocol transformer and message router shell
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
 
 
Weird Constructor 06f6085b85 collecting some ideas 2 years ago
src added dn:send for processes 2 years ago
.gitignore added process interface 2 years ago
COPYING Added license file 3 years ago
Cargo.lock implemented the server side 2 years ago
Cargo.toml Initial commit 3 years ago
README.md Initial commit 3 years ago
init.wl collecting some ideas 2 years ago

README.md

Datynapse - A protocol transformer and message router shell

This application can start sub processes and acts as protocol transformer to connect all these processes with each other. It can also connect to other Daynapse nodes and thus form distributed networks and connect processes between multiple computers in a network.

License

This project is licensed under the GNU General Public License Version 3 or later.

Why GPL?

Picking a license for my code bothered me for a long time. I read many discussions about this topic. Read the license explanations. And discussed this matter with other developers.

First about why I write code for free at all:

  • It's my passion to write computer programs. In my free time I can write the code I want, when I want and the way I want. I can freely allocate my time and freely choose the projects I want to work on.
  • To help a friend or member of my family.
  • To solve a problem I have.

Those are the reasons why I write code for free. Now the reasons why I publish the code, when I could as well keep it to myself:

  • So that it may bring value to users and the free software community.
  • Show my work as an artist.
  • To get into contact with other developers.
  • And it's a nice change to put some more polish on my private projects.

Most of those reasons don't yet justify GPL. The main point of the GPL, as far as I understand: The GPL makes sure the software stays free software until eternity. That the user of the software always stays in control. That the users have at least the means to adapt the software to new platforms or use cases. Even if the original authors don't maintain the software anymore. It ultimately prevents "vendor lock in". I really dislike vendor lock in, especially as developer. Especially as developer I want and need to stay in control of the computers I use.

Another point is, that my work has a value. If I give away my work without any strings attached, I effectively work for free. Work for free for companies. I would compromise the price I can demand for my skill, workforce and time.

This makes two reasons for me to choose the GPL:

  1. I do not want to support vendor lock in scenarios. At least not for free. I want to prevent those when I have a choice. And before you ask, yes I work for a company that sells closed source software. I am not happy about the closed source fact. But it pays my bills and gives me the freedom to write free software in my free time.
  2. I don't want to low ball my own wage and prices by giving away free software with no strings attached (for companies).

If you need a permissive or private license (MIT)

Please contact me if you need a different license and really want to use my code. As long as I am the only author, I can change the license. We might find an agreement.

Contribution

Unless you explicitly state otherwise, any contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in WLambda by you, shall be licensed as GPLv3 or later, without any additional terms or conditions.

Authors