I was a SysOp in the early 90s, briefly running Telegard/Renegade before the internet boom that drove BBS's nearly to extinction. I have recently returned to the BBS scene and tried a few BBS software packages and when I found Mystic, I felt the joy of building and designing a BBS all over
again after 25 years. It truly is the spiritual successor to Telegard & Renegade. =)

Over the past 5-10 years, privacy and security have become more at the forefront of many of our concerns. I want to see Mystic continue grow in security and give attention to privacy. The best way forward in this regard is allowing for peer review on the source code to Mystic and its related utilities. I'd like to make two points regarding this... and open discussion particularly on these two points.

#1. How to open source. I don't believe we necessarily require a GPL (though prefered) license. A registration fee and a copy of the code sent to them ... much like WWIV worked, and this seems to still work as I cannot locate the WWIV 4.x code anywhere. Access to WWIVnet was a huge incentive to registration as well. Granted, it wouldn't take much for this to be abused and undone.

#2. Regarding development. I don't believe it is required that development be opened to everyone either. Development could largely proceed
the way it is now. Disclaimers that patches could be considered, but are
likely not to be accepted can accompany the code.

I am asking that consideration be made for open sourcing the software. I also do not think this is something to be done quickly, but after consideration and discussion (if anything is done at all).

In any case g00r00, I do thank you for your time (and implementation of some of my own feature requests...) and almost 25 years of work on Mystic. I want to support those who support you.

Also thank you to all of the SysOps who keep the scene alive. Keep it
going -- one day, we may need it as Amazon/Facebook/Microsoft/Google slowly kill the internet as it is.

Thanks for your time,
Richard Swartz/roovis/SysOp of w0pr.win

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

On 29 Jan 2020, roovis said the following...

the forefront of many of our concerns. I want to see Mystic continue
grow in security and give attention to privacy. The best way forward in this regard is allowing for peer review on the source code to Mystic and

He had it open source for a while, then stopped a few years or so ago because it wasn't so much continuing to improve it, as much as people were forking it and introducing a ton of bugs that they didn't feel like fixing, and then eventually shortly abandoning, iirc.

I actually (in this case) support Mystic being closed source. It allows g00r00 to control the versioning and the direction of the software without there
being a bunch of potential additionally buggy versions of Mystic and Mystic clones being around.

If it was software that was being updated year 'round on a daily, or almost daily basis, and was something system critical, and at least used by
thousands, or hundreds of thousands of people, I could see it being open. But it's a hobbyist project with little to no monetary gain to g00r00. So I understand why he decided to make it closed.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

I actually (in this case) support Mystic being closed source. It allows g00r00 to control the versioning and the direction of the software
without there being a bunch of potential additionally buggy versions of Mystic and Mystic clones being around.

I can sincerely appreciate this. There would be a lot of noise generated
around Mystic. But shouldn't that be the descretion of the SysOp? As I said before, development doesn't have to change.

I would be willing to contribute financially to Mystic development if it
means we can have access to Mystic source, or some other Mystic-exclusive.

Anyway, the conversation is open. Even if it doesn't result in any change, I
do believe I saw g00r00 hinting that revisiting the issue is on the table for him. Either way, I enjoy Mystic and want to continue supporting it and
g00r00. :) I also hope others in the discussion share my approach to the conversation. This is not one to create discord over.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

I would be willing to contribute financially to Mystic development if it means we can have access to Mystic source, or some other
Mystic-exclusive.

Anyway, the conversation is open. Even if it doesn't result in any
change, I do believe I saw g00r00 hinting that revisiting the issue is

LOL, you're a brave man roovis!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: deadbeatz.org (21:2/123)

On 29 Jan 2020, roovis said the following...

I actually (in this case) support Mystic being closed source. It allo g00r00 to control the versioning and the direction of the software without there being a bunch of potential additionally buggy versions Mystic and Mystic clones being around.

I can sincerely appreciate this. There would be a lot of noise generated around Mystic. But shouldn't that be the descretion of the SysOp? As I said before, development doesn't have to change.

Nah. g00r00 is actually pretty responsive when he gets into "Mystic Mode", and will take any and all suggestions and criticism during that time. He
implements a fairly large amount of them as well, as well as his own ideas.
It should totally be at g00r00's discretion in what direction he wants Mystic to take. The fact that he takes advisement and suggestions to the level he does is, frankly, awesome.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

Nah. g00r00 is actually pretty responsive when he gets into "Mystic

Maybe I wasn't being clear enough. If a SysOp wants to run buggy garbage,
then that should be their option. :)

his own ideas. It should totally be at g00r00's discretion in what direction he wants Mystic to take. The fact that he takes advisement and

Always affirmed this. No demands are being made.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

On 29 Jan 2020 at 02:26p, roovis pondered and said...

Anyway, the conversation is open. Even if it doesn't result in any
change, I do believe I saw g00r00 hinting that revisiting the issue is
on the table for him. Either way, I enjoy Mystic and want to continue supporting it and g00r00. :) I also hope others in the discussion share
my approach to the conversation. This is not one to create discord over.

Hi Richard... just a bit of feedback from me... from my point of view I
thought the way you raised this topic and the responses you have given so far have been measured and are written in such a way not to create discord but rather just ask the open questions and gauge feedback from those about. So
well done from me :)

It's a subject that comes up from time to time. From my point of view any future status of Mystic development rests solely with its author to determine. Perhaps in time it may become open or semi-open or whatnot, but that's up to g00r00 :)

My hope is that should a day arise when g00r00 is no longer involved in developing Mystic, that the source code is not lost to the wider world forever and with it any options to further develop the software. That I think would be a real loss given Mystic has come so far since its creation, and had so much love and effort spent on it over the years.

The older I get the more I am aware of single point dependency issues on
stuff like this and lots of other things I have come across in life. Heck,
I'm guilty of it too in fsxNet because although we have more HUBs now than
the first NET 1 system ..and I have the wonderful support of some great fellow sysops/geeks (shout out to Todd, Dan, Deon, and Ruben) ... there are still several things concerning new memberships, nodelist maintenance etc. that are sitting with me. I need to do better/different on that stuff..

Anywhoo I digress. Thanks for starting the thread and taking part in fsxNet.

Now I'd better get back to my day job as my lunch break is well and truly
over :)

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

After reading your thoughts, I am going to attempt to paraphrase and see if
I'm understanding what you're really looking for, please let me know if I'm totally off base here.

What you are looking for is open access to the source code for being able to make modifications to customize your BBS the way we were able to do with WWIV and VBBS back in the day? If that is the case, then source code access is no longer required as all that can be done with the implementation of the
various scripting languages that Mystic supports (Java, Python, MPL).
---

-Dallas Vinson

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A38 2018/01/01 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Before the Web (21:4/102)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: maskreet to roovis on Wed Jan 29 2020 03:06 pm

I actually (in this case) support Mystic being closed source. It allows g00r00 to control the versioning and the direction of the software without there being a bunch of potential additionally buggy versions of Mystic and Mystic clones being around.

I dont quite agree with this approach to development.

Many eyes are better than one pair - and many hands are faster than one pair.

"master" could still be controlled by g00r00 - ie: he only merges to master what passes his criteria - but many folks could fork off and help fix/develop items (without affecting master).

Seeing folks fork your code can also be positive - they may add features/functions or improve routines that werent thought of previously - and nothing wrong with pulling that stuff back into master.

As procedence - Synchronet's code is publicly available (cvs and git), anybody can fork of a branch, change it - and then share code back to DM, which makes it easy for him to review and commit. I've often looked through the code trying
to understand why something is behaving different than what I expect - and I've provided DM with (what I thought were) descrepancies, which he was then able to review and accept/reject quickly...
...deon


... Chuck Norris did in fact, build Rome in a day.
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Hi Richard... just a bit of feedback from me... from my point of view I thought the way you raised this topic and the responses you have given
so far have been measured and are written in such a way not to create discord but rather just ask the open questions and gauge feedback from those about. So well done from me :)

Thanks Avon. That really means a lot. I understand the subject is touchy and elicits strong reactions from both sides of the discussion -- sometimes with people getting heated and making demands of OTHER people's property.

It's a subject that comes up from time to time. From my point of view any future status of Mystic development rests solely with its author to determine. Perhaps in time it may become open or semi-open or whatnot,
but that's up to g00r00 :)

No one can say or do otherwise. Besides, this has been his baby for 25 years.
I know the gravity of what is being requested. As I said before, this is not our property. It is g00r00's.

My hope is that should a day arise when g00r00 is no longer involved in developing Mystic, that the source code is not lost to the wider world forever and with it any options to further develop the software. That I think would be a real loss given Mystic has come so far since its creation, and had so much love and effort spent on it over the years.

I hope there is some kind of contingency plan in place. If this thread does nothing more than establish such a plan, then it is a job well done.

Anywhoo I digress. Thanks for starting the thread and taking part in fsxNet.

You're welcome!

Cheers!
-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

What you are looking for is open access to the source code for being
able to make modifications to customize your BBS the way we were able to do with WWIV and VBBS back in the day? If that is the case, then source code access is no longer required as all that can be done with the implementation of the various scripting languages that Mystic supports (Java, Python, MPL). ---

That isn't what I'm looking for at all. I'm aware of the flexibility that Mystic provides. I only wish I had something as powerful as Mystic when I was
a sysop in the early 90s.

The primary concern is peer reviewed source code, and after Avon mentioned later, the preservation of that source code.

I understand why the WWIV stuff got confused, but that was only an example of licensing the code if a full GPL source is not the route taken.

Thanks for contributing to the thread.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

I can sincerely appreciate this. There would be a lot of noise generated around Mystic. But shouldn't that be the descretion of the SysOp? As I said before, development doesn't have to change.

The noise generated was almost universally very bad, so that was why I chose to go closed source. Things have been much better since returning to closed. But as you mentioned it is still on the table and something I regularly reconsider!

There were lots of annoyances though:

There were forked versions that were severely broken without really adding new features and people were trying to come for me for support.

There were instances of people flat out stealing the code, changing the name
of the software and slapping their name on it as if it was their work.

The GIT site had constant spammers that would create 50 of the same fake bug report, or spam the forums with nonsense (think of the people who troll this echo from time to time - they're even more unstable when you give them an internet forum). It required constant moderation and attention.

The project was REPEATEDLY reported for GPL violations from those same trolls which never amounted to anything, but still annoying.

And finally, no one really ever came along on the level of someone like Deuce did for Synchronet. For the most part those that came along weren't interested in helping Mystic, they just wanted to take it for their own purposes.

Seeing people literally steal my code and life's work to slap their name on it was pretty shitty. :(

Anyway, the conversation is open. Even if it doesn't result in any
change, I do believe I saw g00r00 hinting that revisiting the issue is
on the table for him. Either way, I enjoy Mystic and want to continue

Its always on the table. There are some benefits too of course, but I just felt the negatives were far outweighing the positives and I was spending too much time dealing with nonsense and too little time writing code.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

My hope is that should a day arise when g00r00 is no longer involved in developing Mystic, that the source code is not lost to the wider world forever and with it any options to further develop the software. That I think would be a real loss given Mystic has come so far since its creation, and had so much love and effort spent on it over the years.

I think this would be tragic too.

The system I have in place is a little weird, but I copy the source code to a USB key every time I release a new alpha (and usually off and on in-between). I have instructions for what to do with that USB drive should something happen.

I have every intention of releasing the source code the day I decide I no longer want to work on it, or can't for whatever reason. That is, if I don't decide to return to open source before that day comes (if it ever does).

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

do with WWIV and VBBS back in the day? If that is the case, then source code access is no longer required as all that can be done with the implementation of the various scripting languages that Mystic supports (Java, Python, MPL). ---

Just to add to that, WWIV doesn't have any way to modify menus and the prompts either back then. With Mystic everything that is sent to the user can be changed using the theme system without any programing.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

There were instances of people flat out stealing the code, changing
the name of the software and slapping their name on it as if it was
their work.

I don't really understand this attitude. People fork opensource projects
all the time, and they change the name - which is important to
differentiate the forked version from the main version. The only fork I
ever knew of was Guardian BBS and my fork of Guardian BBS, Vertigo BBS.
Both Guardian and Vertigo were very clear that it was based on your
work, with your copyright notices left intact.

As for not going anywhere with it, I can't speak for the guy that went
with Guardian, but my reason was I changed my mind. I learned that you
weren't keen on people forking it, so I deleted it (but of course it was
forked again before I deleted it, so that fork still exists).

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really understand the
GPL and ownership in that he claimed you violated the GPL by going back
to closed source.

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.14alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: Nocturnal - nocturnal.hopto.org:2023 (21:1/125)

Just to add to that, WWIV doesn't have any way to modify menus and the prompts either back then. With Mystic everything that is sent to the
user can be changed using the theme system without any programing.

Are you sure? Because I remember just about every WWIV board here in
Huntsville having custom menus on it. And if I remember correctly (I HAVE
slept a few times since then) we were even able to customize the prompts
in the source code.
---

-Dallas Vinson

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A38 2018/01/01 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Before the Web (21:4/102)

Seeing folks fork your code can also be positive - they may add features/functions or improve routines that werent thought of previously
- and nothing wrong with pulling that stuff back into master.

Unfortunately that never happened even once when it was opened sourced. :(

The source was instead flat out stolen and the BBS software name was changed and so on though.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really understand the GPL and ownership in that he claimed you violated the GPL by going back
to closed source.

The violation stuff was happening non-stop, before it was closed source. The stupid behavior was a reason for closing the project, not as a result of it.

The GPL stuff was predominately a couple of FidoNet try-hards from zone 2, and the author of x/84 with a splash of MBSE mixed in towards the end to my knowledge. They are people I never had interactions with prior. I didn't know the Guardian person was one of them, and I didn't know you were one of the spinoffs either until now! hah!

The fact is there were multiple people releasing their own version of Mystic with the same versioning as mine, without really doing anything but slapping their name on it. And there were several people who took the code, changed the name, and slapped their names in the credits... But they didn't contribute.

You don't have to understand why some people think thats a problem or unethical to do that to an active project. But I think its worth understanding that people DO feel that way. And at the very least it caused plenty of confusion.

Let's apply the same to something not Mystic BBS! Gather around kids!

Imagine spending 25 years working on a novel and you're finally nearly done! You spent most of your life working on this novel, and you decide its time to share it with your neighbor so he can help you proof read. You're excited to see what he comes back with, until one day you see your novel in the bookstore.

Instead of helping you, your neighbor took the novel that you spent your entire life working on and published it with his name on it. That's a shitty thing to do in my opinion.

I put Mystic out there for people to help, and instead they took it and slapped their name on it without contributing.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

You don't have to understand why some people think thats a problem
or unethical to do that to an active project. But I think its
worth understanding that people DO feel that way. And at the very
least it caused plenty of confusion.

This is a very good reason not to go opensource. Open Source isn't for everyone. People will make forks, some will continue with their forks in another direction without contributing back, some will contribute back,
some will just change their name and in the case of some linux
distributions, rearrange the desktop and change the wallpaper ;)

Let's apply the same to something not Mystic BBS! Gather around
kids!

Imagine spending 25 years working on a novel and you're finally
nearly done! You spent most of your life working on this novel, and
you decide its time to share it with your neighbor so he can help
you proof read. You're excited to see what he comes back with,
until one day you see your novel in the bookstore.

Instead of helping you, your neighbor took the novel that you spent
your entire life working on and published it with his name on it.
That's a shitty thing to do in my opinion.

Yeah it is, but getting your neighbor to proof read vs going open source
isn't a very good comparison, in this instance you would get your
neighbor to agree not to steal your work, sign an NDA or whatever and
continue on.

Open Sourcing your novel would lead to many spin offs, perhaps by your neighbour, perhaps by others even after it's published. This is one of
the values of opensource, it allows anyone to build upon your work for
example, OpenBSD - or not so great, one of the many debian based distros
that do nothing but change the name and wallpaper.

I put Mystic out there for people to help, and instead they took it
and slapped their name on it without contributing.

I agree that not contributing back is a shame, but they're not obliged
to, in the case of the GPL, they are obliged to make their modifications opensource, so you could pluck out the bits you like if you wanted to.

I would say, if you just want help with mystic, don't go opensource, but
rather take offers from volunteers who are willing to agree not to share
the code.

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.13alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand - telnet://magickabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/126)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: g00r00 to Alter Ego on Wed Jan 29 2020 10:12 pm

Unfortunately that never happened even once when it was opened sourced. :(

That is such a shame...

The source was instead flat out stolen and the BBS software name was changed and so on though.

So I havent authored "that much", and I know something that I took over and re-wrote has has been imbedded in other (some commercial) offerings, and I actually think its cool that my code has cropped up at the most unexpectant times - and used in places that I hadnt even considered.

I even had a complete stranger where I work put 2 and 2 together and connected me with the code that I have written, and said "hi, you're that guy...".

While that might be the bad side "my code has been used in places where I wasnt
asked first" - I think there has been more gooodness:
* I wouldnt have been recognised if I didnt keep it open source, nor do I think
it would have been as popular as it is
* It wouldnt have been used in places that I was surprised it was used
* It wouldnt have been as good if it wasnt for the help that I received along the way
* I had a list of requests, which somebody got to it before I did (and while sometimes I didnt like their coding style, I was able to tweak it to something I would have liked to see)
* And I certainly checked in on some of the forks, and thought "that's a better
way to do that" and merged that commit, idea or method.

At the end of the day, there are pro's and con's, there are people with good intentions and people with bad - but I've used my fair share of open source (and not paid a dime for it), and I say well this is my give back. (And I do it
for fun, not for commercial gain.)

I've learnt way more from other's developers techniques (from their open source
code) - which I think has made me a better developer (well I hope it has anyway...).
...deon


... Some men are discovered; others are found out.
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: apam to g00r00 on Thu Jan 30 2020 03:34 pm

I would say, if you just want help with mystic, don't go opensource, but rather take offers from volunteers who are willing to agree not to share the code.

I do this too right. I run my own instance of gitlab (which is another github),
and put all my code in there. Some goes in there (with a closed group), and the rest goes out in the public (sf.net/github, etc).

So maybe an option g00r00 (just thinking aloud), is you run a private instance of <insert your prefered CVS> and allow a subset to have access and help you out with it. I'm sure there are many here that would like to help (I would have
been one if I still ran mystic) - which you could ultimately have final approval to what makes it to master.
...deon


... A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Many eyes are better than one pair - and many hands are faster than one pair.

This is good, in theory. But in practice not always. Particularly not always with regards to a niche computing environment like BBSing.

For a while, I maintained Daydream. A lot of people forked Daydream and tried to integrate some Warez/scene FTP daemons directly into Daydream. The
codebase became disgusting, full of bugs, and the community simply wanted the FTP integration so they took the changes before anyone else had a chance to look at it. I advised against taking these changes since they were gross and would break things; alas, a number of BBSes broke, and I haven't touched Daydream since.

I think if you have a product with a talented and experienced dev team
looking at it with a community focused on bug-free software, it can work. For BBSing, I'm less convinced.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/16 (Linux/64)
* Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)

If it was software that was being updated year 'round on a daily, or almost daily basis, and was something system critical, and at least used by thousands, or hundreds of thousands of people, I could see it being open.

Like it the way it is. Was reading this & got me to start nagging about as
much as Firefox & Windows 10 is being updated. REALLY irks me that I can't
keep Windows 10 from updating AND rebooting my main system without anything I can do to stop it but keep moving the time further out...if I remember to do so. Mentioning Firefox...love it & been using it for years...but WTF are they doing to keep wanting to update it this often. Don't see this happening with Chrome.

Going back from my circular firing squad...enjoy the software being locked
down by someone who knows what they are doing...rather than a fly-by-night programming outfit getting their jollies on people giving them praise. I remember back in the past when a company would throw out software & worry
about the bugs later...if they were still in business.

ACME BBS-Member of fsxNet/WWIVNet/SciNet/SpookNet/FidoNet/MicroNet.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Windows/32)
* Origin: ACME BBS-I am Wile E Ki-oh-tay, super genius (21:2/147)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: ryan to Alter Ego on Wed Jan 29 2020 10:15 pm

This is good, in theory. But in practice not always. Particularly not always with regards to a niche computing environment like BBSing.

Actually, I would have thought it would be preferable with a niche group like BBSing - we are a small community, and we all still have ideas of how things can be done better.

For a while, I maintained Daydream. A lot of people forked Daydream and tried to integrate some Warez/scene FTP daemons directly into Daydream. The codebase became disgusting, full of bugs, and the community simply wanted the FTP integration so they took the changes before anyone else had a chance to look at it. I advised against taking these changes since they

Forking repositories doesnt mean you have to accept other peoples commits into master. Let those who fork it butcher it if they want - cherry pick the good parts and make your master even better...

That said, if the "users" take on the forks over your code base, then the tribe
has spoken...

IMHO, much better to have an ocean to fish in, and catch a variety of fish (which you can throw back if you dont want it), than have a fish tank with one fish in it, that wont bite your hook.
...deon


... It is only the shallow people who do not judge by appearances.
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

On 29 Jan 2020 at 08:44p, g00r00 pondered and said...

I think this would be tragic too.

The system I have in place is a little weird, but I copy the source code to a USB key every time I release a new alpha (and usually off and on in-between). I have instructions for what to do with that USB drive
should something happen.

This reminds me of stuff like when the Queen dies and stuff automatically
kicks in.. and plan 987137 is executed. We certainly don't need 'if I should...' plans to roll out anytime soon! Just saying.. :)

I have every intention of releasing the source code the day I decide I no longer want to work on it, or can't for whatever reason. That is, if I don't decide to return to open source before that day comes (if it ever does).

Good to know, thanks for clarifying.

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

The source was instead flat out stolen and the BBS software name
was changed and so on though.

How does one steal Open Source code? Is that legally possible?

Was it a GPL violation or not? Removing the author's name and replacing it with
someone elses would be a GPL or copyright violation. Releasing modified binaries without the sources too. Forking and changing the name of the software
is not.

If I compile the old sources on Gitlab and distribute binaries, should I still call the software Mystic BBS? Would that be better?


--- Penis Flattener v1.12 A44
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

On 01-30-20 08:36, Oli wrote to g00r00 <=-

The source was instead flat out stolen and the BBS software name
was changed and so on though.

How does one steal Open Source code? Is that legally possible?

I'd say it actually is possible - by not obeying licence conditions (a big one with GPL), or by simply not acknowledging the original author of the code, making it look like your own, when it isn't.

Was it a GPL violation or not? Removing the author's name and replacing
it with
someone elses would be a GPL or copyright violation. Releasing
modified binaries without the sources too. Forking and changing the
name of the software
is not.

If I compile the old sources on Gitlab and distribute binaries, should
I still call the software Mystic BBS? Would that be better?

It would be good to at least acknowledge what your fork is derived from, and give the original author (g00r00) credit. And if the old source is unmodified, then it is still Mystic and definitely not your work, but releasing binaries of such an old version really doesn't make sense now.


... Not enough mail? Here, let me help...
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (21:1/109)

The noise generated was almost universally very bad, so that was why I chose to go closed source. Things have been much better since returning to closed. But as you mentioned it is still on the table and something I regularly reconsider!

Thanks you for this much right here. :)

Seeing people literally steal my code and life's work to slap their name on it was pretty shitty. :(

Have any of those projects survived? I'm curious.

Its always on the table. There are some benefits too of course, but I just felt the negatives were far outweighing the positives and I was spending too much time dealing with nonsense and too little time writing code.

Thanks again for your response and consideration g00r00.

-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really understand the GPL and ownership in that he claimed you violated the GPL by going back
to closed source.

Forking is not a misclick or an oops. The guy knew.

As far as g00r00 going back to closed source ... if the GPL wasn't being honored elsewhere ... what does it matter if he reverts his own code to
closed source?

That is the problem.

-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

This reminds me of stuff like when the Queen dies and stuff automatically kicks in.. and plan 987137 is executed. We certainly don't need 'if I should...' plans to roll out anytime soon! Just saying.. :)

Are you saying g00r00 needs bodyguards now? ;)

-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

30 Jan 20 22:03, you wrote to me:

How does one steal Open Source code? Is that legally possible?

I'd say it actually is possible - by not obeying licence conditions (a
big one with GPL), or by simply not acknowledging the original author
of the code, making it look like your own, when it isn't.

Theft and copyright infringement are two different things. You steal a laptop and the owner cannot use the laptop anymore. Making a copy of an LP (which is also only a copy) is quite different from that. You can steal the original master tape with the music, but you cannot steal the data of the recording.

Changing the name of the software is not against the GPL and has for sure nothing to do with theft. Removing the original author's name would be a violation of the GPL, but it's still not theft.

If I compile the old sources on Gitlab and distribute binaries,
should I still call the software Mystic BBS? Would that be
better?

It would be good to at least acknowledge what your fork is derived
from, and give the original author (g00r00) credit. And if the old
source is unmodified, then it is still Mystic and definitely not your work, but releasing binaries of such an old version really doesn't
make sense now.

I would agree, but my question was about the name. Would it really be better to
use Mystic BBS as the name and then people would be confused? Which version number should I use in the next release?

What makes sense and what doesn't is subjective. The whole BBS scene doesn't make much sense. Why do people still use such outdated technology? Wouldn't it be much more important to save the world instead? ;)

--- Penis Flattener v1.12 A44
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

Seeing people literally steal my code and life's work to slap
their name on it was pretty shitty. :(

Have any of those projects survived? I'm curious.

of course not, it was just some blip below the noise floor. sucessful forks of an active project are very rare.


---
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

On 29 Jan 2020, g00r00 said the following...

Let's apply the same to something not Mystic BBS! Gather around kids!

Imagine spending 25 years working on a novel and you're finally nearly done! You spent most of your life working on this novel, and you decide its time to share it with your neighbor so he can help you proof read. You're excited to see what he comes back with, until one day you see
your novel in the bookstore.

Instead of helping you, your neighbor took the novel that you spent your entire life working on and published it with his name on it. That's a shitty thing to do in my opinion.

It is, and the reason why I agree with it being closed source. Because two things very similar happened to me in the past. One personally, one not, but still affected me.

The non-personal one was Iniquity BBS. For those that don't know, Mike
Fricker was the original author of Iniquity. It was awesome. Buggy, but awesome. I loved the hell out of it, and spent hours in the mid 90s playing with it, setting it up, configging the hell out of it. Was a total labor of love, as I'm sure you all know with your BBSes. And the software was free.

He eventually sold it to another dude, Michael Pike. This guy put his name
all over it, changed it into a 2 licensed node, but didn't do anything else. And that was the end of Iniquity.

Which follows to the personal screwjob. After I was done setting up my
Iniquity BBS, fully custom (as much as could be), I was telling a "friend" about it, since I knew he was into computers as much as me. He asked if he could check it out, and I said "sure!" Brought my whole computer over to his place, since we were going to play LAN Quake anyway, and let him have a copy
of my BBS to check out. Figured he could get ideas about setting up his own.

Boy, did he. About a week after I was over his place, I finally put my BBS online, one node only because I was poor as shit. Had a ton of people
calling, sending me feedback about how much they loved it, seeing people posting about it on other local boards, it was awesome.

Then the comments started happening. "Hey, your board looks EXACTLY like this other board!" When I asked what the name and number of the BBS was, I called in, and 'lo and fucking behold, this scumbag motherfucker had put my BBS online, changed the name, and replaced the doors menu header, and that was
it. Called it his own. When I called him out on it, he told me, "It's not a
big deal".

So, yeah, I understand why you're reluctant to have Mystic as open source. I obviously hadn't spent near as much time, and it wasn't as labor-intensive, but I get where you're coming from.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

Forking repositories doesnt mean you have to accept other peoples
commits into master. Let those who fork it butcher it if they want - cherry pick the good parts and make your master even better...

While I agree in principle, in practice this hasn't worked. People fork the code into their own hodgepodge of garbage that still has your name and
branding all over it. It diminishes the brand.

And when people take random forks and then ask me for help when something is broken, I either have to look through gross code someone else added or I have to tell them I won't help. It puts me in a rough spot. This happened a lot. This happened tenfold more than someone committing something useful and
pulling a PR against master.

That said, if the "users" take on the forks over your code base, then
the tribe has spoken...

The "users" may not always be the most discriminating bunch and don't care
all the time how well a thing is implemented. I disagree with this statement.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/16 (Linux/64)
* Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)

Was it a GPL violation or not? Removing the author's name and replacing

Hey Oli, I haven't spoken with you before, but frankly your tone is very condescending and your posts are rather pedantic and unhelpful. Are you aware of how you come off?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/16 (Linux/64)
* Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)

Just to add to that, WWIV doesn't have any way to modify menus and th prompts either back then. With Mystic everything that is sent to the user can be changed using the theme system without any programing.

Are you sure? Because I remember just about every WWIV board here in Huntsville having custom menus on it. And if I remember correctly (I HAVE slept a few times since then) we were even able to customize the prompts in the source code.

Yeah thats was the point I was trying to make. Besides ansi files shown for the menu, you needed to have the source code to be able to customize it further. You couldn't change prompts or how those menus functioned with it.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

At the end of the day, there are pro's and con's, there are people with good intentions and people with bad - but I've used my fair share of

There weren't really any(?) pros though. I wanted there to be, but it didn't work out that way. In theory its a good idea, but in execution it wasn't.

No one contributed. And the amount of bullshit I had to deal with increased significantly, in addition to people releasing conflicting versions. Mystic wasn't gaining anything, it was losing because it caused me to have less time and desire to work on it.

I do have other open-sourced projects and I don't care what happens to them. One of my projects has an install count of over 100,000 and people have contributed and tried to fork it, but the contributions while small have been helpful.

Mystic is something I have worked with off and on since I was a teenager. I consider it my personal hobby and I am more protective of that than other projects I've worked on. When I open sourced it, it was to see how it would benefit my hobby. When it became very clear that it wasn't benefiting Mystic, I stopped.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

The source was instead flat out stolen and the BBS software name
was changed and so on though.

How does one steal Open Source code? Is that legally possible?

No, its not legally possible but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen!

If I compile the old sources on Gitlab and distribute binaries, should I still call the software Mystic BBS? Would that be better?

I thought I mentioned that was happening too, but maybe I didn't. There were multiple versions of Mystic 1.10 being released by randoms over the time it was open sourced. And when the insignificant changes they made didn't work, people would still come to me for support. It was a mess on all fronts :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

Seeing people literally steal my code and life's work to slap their n on it was pretty shitty. :(

Have any of those projects survived? I'm curious.

Well the spinoffs were legit and not stolen I think. I never really followed them but to my knowledge they never really did anything but change the name and then stop.

I have seen my code in at least two places without any credit, but I don't even remember exactly what those projects were or if they are active.

And there was one or two people who used the code, made cool things, and
still left my name in there which is cool.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

Then the comments started happening. "Hey, your board looks EXACTLY like this other board!" When I asked what the name and number of the BBS was,
I called in, and 'lo and fucking behold, this scumbag motherfucker had
put my BBS online, changed the name, and replaced the doors menu header,

That really sucks. :(

I think sometimes people can't empathize with what its like when something
like that happens, unless it actually happens to them.

I've always had a little hesitant about putting Sector 7 up because it was Grymmjack's BBS even though he sent me all of his art and I was co-SysOp lol.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (21:1/108)

The non-personal one was Iniquity BBS. For those that don't
know, Mike Fricker was the original author of Iniquity. It was
awesome. Buggy, but awesome. I loved the hell out of it, and
spent hours in the mid 90s playing with it, setting it up,
configging the hell out of it. Was a total labor of love, as I'm
sure you all know with your BBSes. And the software was free.

He eventually sold it to another dude, Michael Pike. This guy
put his name all over it, changed it into a 2 licensed node, but
didn't do anything else. And that was the end of Iniquity.

You just made a convincing argument against closed source software..


--- v1.12 A45
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

30 Jan 20 09:13, you wrote to me:

Was it a GPL violation or not? Removing the author's name and
replacing

Hey Oli, I haven't spoken with you before, but frankly your tone
is very condescending and your posts are rather pedantic and
unhelpful. Are you aware of how you come off?

You prefer living in a world of misinformation and made up stuff? I thought you
already had enough of that in the US.

What I read from others were insults and personal attacks (not only directed to
me). Nobody ever complained about that. This seems to be more acceptable than being pedantic ... But being partisan over everything else is the new normal (in some countries)

Finding bugs and reporting them is unhelpful?

Defending open source culture is unhelpful?

Maybe for some people ...

--- v1.12 A45
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

On 30 Jan 2020, g00r00 said the following...

Then the comments started happening. "Hey, your board looks EXACTLY l this other board!" When I asked what the name and number of the BBS w I called in, and 'lo and fucking behold, this scumbag motherfucker ha put my BBS online, changed the name, and replaced the doors menu head

That really sucks. :(

I think sometimes people can't empathize with what its like when
something like that happens, unless it actually happens to them.

I've always had a little hesitant about putting Sector 7 up because it
was Grymmjack's BBS even though he sent me all of his art and I was co-SysOp lol.

It did. I'm still pissed about it, because he really didn't have any empathy about it. Pretty much killed our friendship from that point on. I saw him a
few times since then, and learned he died a couple years ago from a drug overdose, or car crash, or something, maybe a combo of the two, I don't remember.

In regards to S7, I think having it up would be an awesome thing, imo. I've always thought that it being up with you at the helm would be great publicity for Mystic, and it would drive people to visit and keep abreast of Mystic stuff, see the new changes being made.

Look at Cap's boards, dude still gets tons of calls in a day. There's
something to being recognized in this, or really any community that gives people the warm and fuzzies. =) Hell, I know I'd call into your board on a daily basis, and I literally only call into mine daily now. Plus, you know you'd get a ton of contributions as far as art would go.

And it's not like Grymmy's passed on or anything, he's still around. I see
him posting occasionally on Facebook, usually links to Soundcloud for stuff he's authored. He was interested a few years ago about coming back, I think
it might cause him to pop his head back up and participate again, time willing, if you did.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

On 30 Jan 2020, Oli said the following...

The non-personal one was Iniquity BBS. For those that don't
know, Mike Fricker was the original author of Iniquity. It was awesome. Buggy, but awesome. I loved the hell out of it, and
spent hours in the mid 90s playing with it, setting it up,
configging the hell out of it. Was a total labor of love, as I'm
sure you all know with your BBSes. And the software was free.

He eventually sold it to another dude, Michael Pike. This guy
put his name all over it, changed it into a 2 licensed node, but didn't do anything else. And that was the end of Iniquity.

You just made a convincing argument against closed source software..

To a point, I agree. But that's a worse case scenario. I get that closed
source can lead to frustration if the author decides to either shut things
down permanently or sell it off to someone else; look at all the door games that are crippled that nobody can register.

My hope for Mystic, and g00r00 confirmed, is that if/when he decides he
doesn't want to work on it anymore, he releases the code before then. That's
a scenario I can get behind in this instance.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

On 30 Jan 2020, Oli said the following...

Finding bugs and reporting them is unhelpful?

Defending open source culture is unhelpful?

As I tell my store managers, it's not always what you say, it's how your message is perceived. For 99% of us perception is reality.

What I read from others were insults and personal attacks (not only directed to me). Nobody ever complained about that. This seems to be
more acceptable than being pedantic ... But being partisan over

I saw a few and they were responded to by g00r00 and stopped. Your's didn't.

-=>Richard Miles<=-
-=>Captain Obvious<=-
-=>bbs.shadowscope.com<=-

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/30 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Shadowscope BBS | bbs.shadowscope.com | Temple, GA (21:1/157)

Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: Oli to ryan on Thu Jan 30 2020 19:29:33

Defending open source culture is unhelpful?

No, but it's often nauseating and overzealous. Not always, but often. Nature of
the beast.

Was it a GPL violation or not? Removing the author's name and
replacing

I think the spirit of the original comment was that people were taking said OSS, giving no credit, and passing the work off as their own. "Stealing" may not be the best term for it,
but it's not too far off the mark; there's something sleazy and dishonest about
it.

Language and accuracy are important, but it's good to be flexible and not leap into lawyer-mode whenever somebody uses a term a little too loosely. It gets very tiresome.

Obviously people are free to copy and mangle OSS to whatever extent the license
permits. Supporting that philosophy doesn't mean that you have to love every way in which it is applied.

People can do plenty of shitty things within the confines of the law. People can say plenty of horrible and rude stuff that is technically true. Still shitty.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
* Origin: electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com (21:1/164)

You just made a convincing argument against closed source
software..

To a point, I agree. But that's a worse case scenario. I get
that closed source can lead to frustration if the author decides
to either shut things down permanently or sell it off to someone
else; look at all the door games that are crippled that nobody
can register.

Most of that happened at a time where the interest in BBSing were rapidly declining. Some authors sold their software because they already knew what was coming. Some packages were released as open source, but nobody uses or maintains them anymore. Too many BBS and fidonet packages for two few users.

My hope for Mystic, and g00r00 confirmed, is that if/when he
decides he doesn't want to work on it anymore, he releases the
code before then. That's a scenario I can get behind in this
instance.

When will this be? In 30 years? ;)

---
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

When will this be? In 30 years? ;)

Precisely when g00r00 means to.

-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

On 30 Jan 2020, Oli said the following...

My hope for Mystic, and g00r00 confirmed, is that if/when he
decides he doesn't want to work on it anymore, he releases the
code before then. That's a scenario I can get behind in this instance.

When will this be? In 30 years? ;)

If so, I'd be okay with it. I think he'd be nice enough to release it if he's done with it. Plus, he did say he's given instructions on releases the source code if anything happens to him. I trust him.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

On 30 Jan 2020 at 08:36a, Oli pondered and said...

--- Penis Flattener v1.12 A44
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

Oli, if you want to make a constructive points about something I (and
I'm sure others here) are totally fine with that, but when I see this kind of thing, it's really unnecessary and not in the spirit of the goals of this network. Please cease that kind of thing.

My general comment about all of this is there's a time to make a point and a time to stop. Debate for debates sake seems kinda counter productive to me in that in the end it's just turns off the vary audience the debater is trying
to convince of their point of view etc. I fear you're well down that path on some counts.

I certainly applaud the technical observations, feedback and comments that progress an issue but gotta say at times it feels a bit overcooked to me (and
I suspect others to)

All of this is not to suggest you're not welcome here or anything of the
sort. Rather I just ask consider how loud or how many times you feel the need to bang the drum and repeat a similar tune. Most hear it the first time just fine.

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

31 Jan 20 09:25, you wrote to me:

--- Penis Flattener v1.12 A44
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

Oli, if you want to make a constructive points about something I
(and I'm sure others here) are totally fine with that, but when
I see this kind of thing, it's really unnecessary and not in the
spirit of the goals of this network. Please cease that kind of
thing.

Now references to popular TV shows are forbidden?*

Insulting people and other software is fine as long as it is done by the author
of mystic bbs or against unpopular people, but silliness is not?

I'll stop when I don't have to read garbled mails anymore that have been changed in-transit or someone cuts my feed. Whatever comes first.

Btw, what is the goal of the network? Excluding users with mobile clients and making fun of them? Shooting the messenger? Well done!

*We will see who goes too the Good Place and who gets his penis flattened in the Bad Place ...


--- It's just a stupid Tearline v1.12 A45
* Origin: 🦄 🌈 (21:1/151)

On 30 Jan 2020 at 10:26p, Oli pondered and said...

Now references to popular TV shows are forbidden?*

It's not a TV show I know of or watch so the reference is lost on me. My perception is that it's intended to offend and it's not kind, respectful nor helpful behaviour.

Insulting people and other software is fine as long as it is done by the author of mystic bbs or against unpopular people, but silliness is not?

I'm not going to revisit every he said/she said comment made in the thread. What I am going to do is ask you again politely to cease the behavour that comes across as disruptive and inciting discord.

I'll stop when I don't have to read garbled mails anymore that have been changed in-transit or someone cuts my feed. Whatever comes first.

Firstly, no one wants to 'feed cut' you. This ain't Fidonet. But equally this ain't Fidonet and if you feel a successful strategy here is to keep making a point by engaging in what comes across (rightly or wrongly) as a combative style to make (and keep making) a point... I fear you're Nirvana of
non-garbled mails will not eventuate. The fact that you respond in this 'I'll stop when...' manner isn't going to work well for you in fsxNet.

Btw, what is the goal of the network? Excluding users with mobile
clients and making fun of them? Shooting the messenger? Well done!

The goals of the network are publicly stated. How you choose to perceive my attempt to engage with you on this topic in an open, honest and constructive manner is up to you.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really
understand the GPL and ownership in that he claimed you
violated the GPL by going back to closed source.

Forking is not a misclick or an oops. The guy knew.

I think you misunderstand what I was saying. Of course he knew he was
making a fork.

As far as g00r00 going back to closed source ... if the GPL wasn't
being honored elsewhere ... what does it matter if he reverts his
own code to closed source?

Even if it was completely honored gOOrOO is free to go back to closed
source if he wishes, of course the open sourced version will remain
opensource, but new versions would not be. gOOrOO owns the copyright,
he's free to use whatever license he wants.

That's the point I was trying to make, he didn't understand the gpl when
he made the comment that gOOrOO was in violation by making his own
software closed source again - which is clearly not a violation. (If
there had been contributions in which people had not signed off their
copyright it might get a bit grey - but there hadn't been.)

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.13alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand - telnet://magickabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/126)

Quoting G00r00 to Alter Ego <=-

At the end of the day, there are pro's and con's, there are people with good intentions and people with bad - but I've used my fair share of

There weren't really any(?) pros though. I wanted there to be, but it didn't work out that way. In theory its a good idea, but in execution
it wasn't.
No one contributed. And the amount of bullshit I had to deal with increased significantly, in addition to people releasing conflicting versions. Mystic wasn't gaining anything, it was losing because it
caused me to have less time and desire to work on it.

Although I haven't been in the same spot, I'm damned sympathetic. Trying to manage a coding project changes it from a passion project/hobby to a damnable job. And I imagine you love having the freedom to just check out and stop doing Mystic shit when it feels like it.

I'd say MPL is the next best thing to open sourcing Mystic. You can mess with
a lot of the internals, but nobody's going to be able to just run away with
it and put their own name on it.


... Press <Ctrl-Alt-Del> now to access the pirate software.
___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Black Flag <ACiD Telnet HQ> blackflagbbs.com (21:1/112)

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really
understand the GPL and ownership in that he claimed you
violated the GPL by going back to closed source.

Forking is not a misclick or an oops. The guy knew.

I think you misunderstand what I was saying. Of course he knew he was making a fork.

I meant forking was not trivial. If he had enough know how to fork a project, he had enough know how to read the GPL and understand it. The fault was mine for not making this clearer. Apologies.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

Language and accuracy are important, but it's good to be flexible and
not leap into lawyer-mode whenever somebody uses a term a little too loosely. It gets very tiresome.

echicken, you are consistently my favorite communicator.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/16 (Linux/64)
* Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)

I do understand the guy who forked Guardian didn't really
understand the GPL and ownership in that he claimed you
violated the GPL by going back to closed source.

Forking is not a misclick or an oops. The guy knew.

I think you misunderstand what I was saying. Of course he knew
he was making a fork.

I meant forking was not trivial. If he had enough know how to fork
a project, he had enough know how to read the GPL and understand
it. The fault was mine for not making this clearer. Apologies.

I tend to disagree, forking is easy as clicking "fork this project" on
github.

As for reading the license, perhaps he should have - perhaps he did, but
didn't understand it - or perhaps (like so many others) assume they know
what the intent is from what they've heard or read elsewhere and not
bother.

Either way, it's not really all that important what he did or didn't do,
his fork was legit, it was his comment about gOOrOO making it closed
source again being a violation that wasn't correct.

Perhaps he just made that comment to me - I don't remember, but it's not
really that important.

I'm pretty sure he's abandoned it now anyway.

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.13alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand - telnet://magickabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/126)

Some bits and thoughts on the subject. :)

- I would really love to see Mystic be an Open Source project in the future.
- I will love it even more, if others come and contribute also...
- I will be really disappointed, if no one is contributing, respecting the
license, that the project will be...
- I will be even more disappointed if no one contributes, because of lack of
knowledge about Mystic and pascal programming.
- g00r00 and any one else who makes a software project, is free to choose, if
his project would be OS or CS.
- No one has the write to force his will, on the author, except from telling
him his views about the matter.
- Every user is free to choose if he wants to use, or even just like a
project, because it's OS or CS.
- There are enough BBS projects, that are OS, but still there is not a lot of
support/contribution to them.
- From what i have seen the last years, Mystic BBS has a "weird type" of
support, from the community. What i mean is that, a lot of people using it,
a lot of people are eager to help others to use it, but not a lot are willing
to make stuff for it, like themes, mods, tools etc. For me, this is a sign,
that even if the project goes 100% OS, there will be no contribution or just
a minimum amount of it.
- g00r00 does a great job all by him self and the development of Mystic is
very good. Why everyone thinks, that if the project goes OS, the development
will be better? Let say that tomorrow he decides to make it OS... who is
ready to implement things in Pascal, for Mystic? It would be nice to form a
team to start contributing from now.
- OS doesn't always mean that a project will continue to develop. Many closed
source projects have a lot of development and also, many OS projects when
became OS, their dev. stopped. Making/creating an OS project doesn't
guarantee anything about its development. Don't ask for a project to be OS,
just because now days is something like a "fashion" to make OS projects.


I don't dis/agree to any point of views in here... i am only saying... give
the man a slack, say a thank you for time to time and if you really want the project to be Open Source, support it from now, by making stuff for it. If you want an author to release his work as OS, make him to believe that there are people that will continue his work, like he does and not just "steal" it or misuse it.

After all, if something goes wrong and mystic bbs is lost, we still have the 1.10 version.. :p~~~

My gratitude to g00r00, for using Pascal to make Mystic ;), for even just makin the 1.10 open to the public, cause his code taught me a lot about pascal and programming in general.

:: XQTR :: Another Droid BBS :: andr01d.zapto.org:9999 :: xqtr@gmx.com

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Another Droid BBS # andr01d.zapto.org:9999 (21:1/111)

On 31 Jan 2020, xqtr said the following...

- From what i have seen the last years, Mystic BBS has a "weird type" of
support, from the community. What i mean is that, a lot of people
using it, a lot of people are eager to help others to use it, but not a lot are willing to make stuff for it, like themes, mods, tools etc. For me, this is a sign, that even if the project goes 100% OS, there will be no contribution or just a minimum amount of it.

I dunno about that. There're a lot of Mystic-specific mods out there. I've
even written a few. Gryphon is another off the top of my head. Dream master wrote a ton back in the day, and is occasionally updating them to work with current Mystic versions.

I actually even wrote a mod for Hawk that will let him ban or warn duplicate IPs on sign-up just a few weeks ago, specifically for Mystic.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

I dunno about that. There're a lot of Mystic-specific mods out there.
I've even written a few. Gryphon is another off the top of my head.
Dream master wrote a ton back in the day, and is occasionally updating them to work with current Mystic versions.

It all depends on the point of view :)

How many are using Mystic BBS? How many do they actually write about it? even as a theme, tutorial, script, help file etc?

Also many scripts/mods out there, even mine, are outdated, which means that
the "supporters" (modders) don't catch up with the development of Mystic it self. ;)

:: XQTR :: Another Droid BBS :: andr01d.zapto.org:9999 :: xqtr@gmx.com

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Another Droid BBS # andr01d.zapto.org:9999 (21:1/111)

On 01 Feb 2020, xqtr said the following...

How many are using Mystic BBS? How many do they actually write about it? even as a theme, tutorial, script, help file etc?

Yep. I know I have some old tutorials up for Synchronet. Need to put a few up for Mystic as well. I think with the changes to the theming system, that will make it easy for folks to share themes. Whether anyone will or not is the question. I can see it coming down to a few things:

1. Shitty themes exported but at least it gives folks ideas.
2. Folks that do a superb job modding their boards but don't want to share because it's, well, "my theme" and don't want your BBS to resemble it.
3. A few really good ones.

Also many scripts/mods out there, even mine, are outdated, which means that the "supporters" (modders) don't catch up with the development of

A lot. I've managed to fix one, maybe two here that weren't working but am definitely not a programmer and due to work just have never had the time to really figure out the scripting language. Early on I managed to figure out tweeting from the BBS before anyone had released any mpy's and used that for
a long time but that's about the extent of what I can do. I replaced that
with someone else's because they added Telegram to their script and I am a heavy Telegram user.

-=>Richard Miles<=-
-=>Captain Obvious<=-
-=>bbs.shadowscope.com<=-

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/31 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Shadowscope BBS | bbs.shadowscope.com | Temple, GA (21:1/157)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: ryan to echicken on Thu Jan 30 2020 18:22:17

echicken, you are consistently my favorite communicator.

Shucks.

Sometimes I feel like a meta-communicator. I often find myself communicating about communication itself. I suppose two of my biggest hobbies revolve around communication, so that's no surprise.

FWIW, I appreciate that you and others around here actually *discuss* things in
the fine middle ground between twitteresque oneliners and overlong diatribes.
It's nice to see paragraphs, but not too many of them, in other words.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
* Origin: electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com (21:1/164)

On 01 Feb 2020, Captain Obvious said the following...

1. Shitty themes exported but at least it gives folks ideas.
2. Folks that do a superb job modding their boards but don't want to
share because it's, well, "my theme" and don't want your BBS to resemble it. 3. A few really good ones.

I have a theme I was working on which basically turned the Mystic into a
Image BBS for the Commodore 64, it's not great, but it's not bad. Once I
finish it (If I ever do I just have to do the message bases) I will release it.. It's not the greatest, but it's fun to look at.. LOL

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/30 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Wrong Number Family Of BBS' - Wrong Number ][ (21:4/131)

On 01 Feb 2020, echicken said the following...

FWIW, I appreciate that you and others around here actually *discuss* things in the fine middle ground between twitteresque oneliners and overlong diatribes. It's nice to see paragraphs, but not too many of
them, in other words.

You mean like, me. ;)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: maskreet to echicken on Sat Feb 01 2020 15:27:26

You mean like, me. ;)

Sometimes a one line message is all that's needed.

I'm just talking about the difference between "Thing is bad" and "Thing is bad because ...". Lots of people like to share their opinion in twenty words or less; fewer people back it up with a solid argument. (This has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand, BTW. I'm just rambling.)

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
* Origin: electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com (21:1/164)

FWIW, I appreciate that you and others around here actually *discuss* things in the fine middle ground between twitteresque oneliners and overlong diatribes. It's nice to see paragraphs, but not too many of them, in other words.

You mean like, me. ;)

Yes, even you. Your opinion was valuable in that discussion, though we do not ultimately agree. Thanks for your input in this thread, and your
participation in the community as a whole.

-roovis

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Linux/64)
* Origin: w0pr.win (21:4/165)

On 01 Feb 2020, echicken said the following...

Re: Re: Open sourcing Mystic
By: maskreet to echicken on Sat Feb 01 2020 15:27:26

You mean like, me. ;)

Sometimes a one line message is all that's needed.

I'm just talking about the difference between "Thing is bad" and "Thing
is bad because ...". Lots of people like to share their opinion in
twenty words or less; fewer people back it up with a solid argument.
(This has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand, BTW. I'm just rambling.)

I didn't mind if you did include me in those with verbal diarrhea. I know I tend to ramble, in both the written and verbal word.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

On 01 Feb 2020, roovis said the following...

FWIW, I appreciate that you and others around here actually *dis things in the fine middle ground between twitteresque oneliners overlong diatribes. It's nice to see paragraphs, but not too man them, in other words.

You mean like, me. ;)

Yes, even you. Your opinion was valuable in that discussion, though we
do not ultimately agree. Thanks for your input in this thread, and your participation in the community as a whole.

heh I was replying to echicken's "overlong diatribes", which I'm definitely guilty of. =)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: throwbackbbs.com -\- meriden, ct -\- (21:1/114)

I have a theme I was working on which basically turned the Mystic into a Image BBS for the Commodore 64, it's not great, but it's not bad. Once I

Would love to see what it takes to make a theme. If you don't mind sending
the scripts with fake names of files & such...should be able to find out how
to do something I've had an idea about.

ACME BBS-Member of fsxNet/WWIVNet/SciNet/SpookNet/FidoNet/MicroNet.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Windows/32)
* Origin: ACME BBS-I am Wile E Ki-oh-tay, super genius (21:2/147)

On 01 Feb 2020, Phoobar said the following...

Would love to see what it takes to make a theme. If you don't mind
sending the scripts with fake names of files & such...should be able to find out how to do something I've had an idea about.

Once I get a few things done here today I will try to finish the message base area of it, if I do I will send it along to you. It's very easy, the menu editing is actually very powerful..

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/30 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Wrong Number Family Of BBS' - Wrong Number ][ (21:4/131)

Would love to see what it takes to make a theme. If you don't mind sending the scripts with fake names of files & such...should be able find out how to do something I've had an idea about.

Once I get a few things done here today I will try to finish the message base area of it, if I do I will send it along to you. It's very easy,
the menu editing is actually very powerful..

Thank you! Been looking for the steps to be able to do this...but have found little to nothing on how to set it up.

Looking forward to looking on the items which do this.

ACME BBS-Member of fsxNet/WWIVNet/SciNet/SpookNet/FidoNet/MicroNet.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Windows/32)
* Origin: ACME BBS-I am Wile E Ki-oh-tay, super genius (21:2/147)

On 02 Feb 2020, Phoobar said the following...

Thank you! Been looking for the steps to be able to do this...but have found little to nothing on how to set it up.

Looking forward to looking on the items which do this.

When I say it's not hard, it really isn't all you are doing is creating new menus for the BBS under a new theme, once the menus are set you just create
new ansi files. To me g00r00 has made this BBS so simple to use even a dope like me can understand it.. Before anyone says I am not, it just took me 2 hours to set up a Sunrise Door! So no comments.. LOL Phoo netmail me your
email address and I will send you off what I have I won't be getting ot
finish it today but you can see what I have done with the rest..

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/02/01 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Wrong Number Family Of BBS' - Wrong Number ][ (21:4/131)

even a dope like me can understand it.. Before anyone says I am not, it just took me 2 hours to set up a Sunrise Door! So no comments.. LOL Phoo

Just 2 hours? I spent at least a couple of days researching door setup & asking about how to do it here.

netmail me your email address and I will send you off what I have I
won't be getting ot finish it today but you can see what I have done
with the rest..

Will do that in a few. Getting ready to hit the sack to be at the salt mines
at 6 AM.

Spent much of the day watching Mrs. Brown's Boys on Britbox & working with an OS/2 4.52 VDI image which works. Can't believe I can't remember how to do
stuff I used to be able to do in my sleep.

Thanks for the info...

ACME BBS-Member of fsxNet/WWIVNet/SciNet/SpookNet/FidoNet/MicroNet.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A44 2020/01/28 (Windows/32)
* Origin: ACME BBS-I am Wile E Ki-oh-tay, super genius (21:2/147)