Subject Re: [IBO] Open Source Marathon
Author Patrick O'Keeffe
Hi Paul,

I currently have two options on the table at the moment:

1. I give it to Jason and make it Trustware.

2. Put it under the MPL and use something akin to the model you describe.

I have to admit that based on current input from existing customers, that I
am currently leaning towards 2.

I plan to release the source code to Marathon 2.0 and not 1.6. This is
because the 2.0 code base is streets ahead in maturity and builds on 1.6
anyway so to release 1.6 would be a waste of time and add to the confusion.
I also plan to release all of the WIP R&D I've done relating to Marathon
over the last couple of years - all in all it's about a million lines of



----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Schmidt" <paul@...>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 2:33 AM
Subject: Re: [IBO] Open Source Marathon

> Patrick:
> On 4 May 2001, at 20:17, Patrick O'Keeffe wrote:
> > Due to my shifting priorities it has become nigh on impossible to meet
> > my commitments to Marathon and my customers as fully as I would like
> > to. To this end we have decided to open source Marathon.
> >
> > This decision has been a long time in the making and was not easy to
> > come to as it is difficult to 'let go'.
> >
> > I am basically writing to canvas your opinion on the best way forward
> > before I just 'chuck the source out there'.
> The best open source model, has to be the Linux Kernel, Linus
> (Torvalds) maintains an official tree, encourages submissions of
> changes to him, and makes sure of the quality of the code. He
> doesn't do all of this personally, there is a group of people, each
> responsible for certain pieces, submissions that are not properly
> written, or break other components are either fixed or rejected.
> If your going to open source something, then please make it open
> source, the open/closed model seems to be growing in popularity, IB
> is a perfect example, Borland opened the source so they could get
> other people to contribute, but they can keep their changes hidden
> (closed), and charge bix bucks for them, read the licence. The
> biggest problem with this Open/Closed model, is that it often results
> in a code fork, in IB's case the code forked into Firebird, almost
> immediately. The purely open Linux Kernel hasn't forked although
> it's been around for nearly 10 years.
> I haven't used Marathon, although I will download a copy today, I
> sincerely hope that in opening the source you don't make the other
> mistake that Borland did, they kept all previous versions closed,
> with big licence fees.
> ybe that is the first step, you need to decide if you want a fully
> open source project like the Linux Kernel, open that is open only to
> registered users (like IBO), or an Open/Closed model like IB.
> Paul
> Paul Schmidt,
> Tricat Technologies
> Email: paul@...
> Website:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to