or just a bit nasty?
FourthWorld wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 6:02 pmI have deep admiration and respect for Paul McClernan, but Apple won't be supporting legacy CPU instruction sets forever. Given their history of using architectural shifts to weed out devs to protect only the most loyal willing to keep investing $$$$$ to stay current with the moving target that is an Apple platform, I'd wager they nix legacy instruction sets within 24 months. That may be plenty of time, or not, I don't know because I've never made a CPU update recompile of the LC code base and related externals.richmond62 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 18, 2022 6:22 pm To a large extent this whole discussion seems a bit academic because:
1. The last Open Source version of Livecode is freely available and can be used for teaching (as I am doing right now), and standalones can be made from it.
2. A non-LC branded Open Source version of 9.6.3 with
additions is in the pipeline (I have tested an early version on Linux).
Moreover, GPL is a very specific license, in which "free" isn't about "gratis" but "libre". GPL is a great license when proliferation of code is the goal, but not every project has that goal. I've known educators who prefer MIT not because they need proprietary commercial works but just to simplify licensing requirements for any additional components they may use, distribution channel needs, and others.
In short, the forked FOSS is a useful short-term solution, and the work is much appreciated. But its viability beyond a few semesters cannot be known at this time. And even where it may be technically viable, a non-GPL license will be needed by some individuals and organizations, even non-for-profit ones, depending on their larger goals.