Python 2.4杀死商业Windows Python开发？ [英] Python 2.4 killing commercial Windows Python development ?
问题描述
我已经使用python为我们的Java
应用程序编写一个简单的''启动器'了很长一段时间了。我最近更新了它以使用python
2.4，一切看起来都很好。
今天，我的一位同事注意到，在她的机器上发射器会
抱怨它丢失了一个DLL - msvcr71.dll
然而，关于所述DLL的重新分配还有一个非常灰色的区域。
如果你一直在关注开发列表，以及其他一些网站讨论，你会发现这已经出现了好几次，但是除了''自己调查
法律条款''之外，没有任何合法方式的结论。
我是现在要回到使用2.3直到这个问题得到解决，
但是根据开发列表讨论的方式判断，我得到了
的印象等待很长时间。
我看不出任何公司（或个人）如何分发用python编写的
应用程序，然后'''冷冻''（我用d py2exe）以任何
方式，如果他们依赖标准附带的python24.dll。这是
在可用性方面肯定会倒退一步。
我不知道重建不同版本的问题
of python24.dll将链接到常见的msvcr.dll或其他任何东西，
或更改''冻结''应用程序以做一些魔术，但我不能
相信当他们尝试使用该语言时，应该向最终用户跳过合法或者b $ b b编译圈。
道歉这看起来比我想要的更具侵略性 - 我是
只是在我可以预见的未来停止跟随我的选择语言而感到沮丧工作有关。
Michael。
I''ve been using python to write a simple ''launcher'' for one of our Java
applications for quite a while now. I recently updated it to use python
2.4, and all seemed well.
Today, one of my colleagues noted that on her machine the launcher would
complain it was missing a DLL - msvcr71.dll
However, there''s a very grey area concerning the redistribution of said DLL.
If you''ve been keeping up with the dev list, and some other web
discussions, you''ll see that this has cropped up several times, but with
no conclusion in a legal fashion other than ''investigate it on your own
legal terms''.
I''m now going to have step back to using 2.3 until this issue is solved,
but judging by the way the dev list discussion just faded, I get the
impression that it may be a long wait.
I can''t see how any company (or individual) can distribute an
application written in python, and then ''frozen'' (I used py2exe) in any
way if they rely on the python24.dll that ships as standard. This is
surely a step backwards in usability.
I have no idea concerning the issues of rebuilding a different version
of python24.dll to be linked against the common msvcr.dll or whatever,
or changing the ''freeze'' applications to do some magic, but I can''t
believe it should be down to the end user to jump through legal or
compilation hoops when they''re trying to use the language.
Apologies if this seems more aggressive than I intended it to be - I''m
just frustrated at having to stop following my language of choice for
the foreseeable future so far as my work is concerned.
Michael.
推荐答案
Michael Kearns< mi ****** ******@REMOVEsaaconsultants.com>写道：
Michael Kearns <mi************@REMOVEsaaconsultants.com> writes:
我已经使用python为我们的一个Java应用程序编写了一个简单的''启动器'，现在已经有一段时间了。我最近更新了它以使用
python 2.4，一切似乎都很好。
今天，我的一位同事注意到在她的机器上发射器会抱怨它丢失了一个DLL - msvcr71.dll
然而，关于所述DLL的重新分发还有一个非常灰色的区域。
如果你一直在跟上开发列表，在其他一些网络讨论中，你会发现这已经出现了好几次，但是除了调查你自己的法律条款之外，还没有以合法的方式得出结论。 '。
我现在要回到使用2.3，直到这个问题得到解决，但是根据开发列表讨论的方式来判断，我是
得到的印象可能是漫长的等待。
我无法看到任何公司（或个人）如何分发用python编写的应用程序，然后冻结 '（我使用py2exe）
如果它们依赖于发布的python24.dll 作为标准。这个
肯定是可用性的倒退。
I''ve been using python to write a simple ''launcher'' for one of our
Java applications for quite a while now. I recently updated it to use
python 2.4, and all seemed well.
Today, one of my colleagues noted that on her machine the launcher
would complain it was missing a DLL - msvcr71.dll
However, there''s a very grey area concerning the redistribution of said DLL.
If you''ve been keeping up with the dev list, and some other web
discussions, you''ll see that this has cropped up several times, but
with no conclusion in a legal fashion other than ''investigate it on
your own legal terms''.
I''m now going to have step back to using 2.3 until this issue is
solved, but judging by the way the dev list discussion just faded, I
get the impression that it may be a long wait.
I can''t see how any company (or individual) can distribute an
application written in python, and then ''frozen'' (I used py2exe) in
any way if they rely on the python24.dll that ships as standard. This
is surely a step backwards in usability.
对于商业开发，购买许可证应该不是问题
for MSVC 7.1，它赋予你分发msvcrt71.dll的权利。
也许这就是很少有人关心这个问题的原因？
Thomas
For commercial development, it should not be a problem to buy a license
for MSVC 7.1, which gives you the right to distribute msvcrt71.dll.
And maybe that''s the reason that few people care about this issue?
Thomas
Thomas Heller写道：
Thomas Heller wrote:
对于商业开发，购买应该不是问题MSVC 7.1的许可证，它授予您分发msvcrt71.dll的权利。
也许这就是很少有人关心这个问题的原因？
For commercial development, it should not be a problem to buy a license
for MSVC 7.1, which gives you the right to distribute msvcrt71.dll.
And maybe that''s the reason that few people care about this issue?
Thomas，
我看到它有一些问题。从理论上讲，对于一个大型组织来说，MSVC 7.1的成本不应该是一个问题。但是，我不会期望必须去购买它纯粹是因为我正在开发
（也许）使用python的共享软件应用程序 - 这不是'我的情况，但是
我从一个大的组织角度来看我并没有看到它。
另外，我不相信只是''拥有''MSVC 7.1就足够了。从
粗略浏览各种redist文件，我还必须发送给EULA的
，作为最终用户（python），我不能只是重新分发
文件 - 也许我可以在MSVC中写一个占位符应用程序来
表明我不再是最终用户，但这似乎是荒谬的/>
解决方法。
甚至似乎有''排除''重新分配关于
开源材料的条款，但IANAL和从各个段落开始。
我想认为python会鼓励尽可能多的人使用这种语言，而不管它最适合哪种语言（和或许甚至超过了b $ b。然而这是朝着相反的方向发展的。
对于没有法律术语的附加版本来说难以实现是
在Windows上提供，或者至少是某种声明
关于什么是不允许的？在
python发行版中似乎没有任何内容表明dll的再分配权利
（如果我错了，请纠正我），这似乎已经与MS相反了。 >
要求。
尽管我想继续使用它，但由于模糊的合法
情况，我可以'不幸的是，那是不幸的。
Michael。
Hi Thomas,
There are a few problems with this as I see it. In theory, the ''cost'' of
MSVC 7.1 shouldn''t be a problem for a big organisation. However, I
wouldn''t expect to have to go and buy it purely because I''m developing
(perhaps) a shareware application using python - this isn''t my case, but
I wasn''t looking at it from just a big organisation perspective.
Also, I don''t believe that just ''owning'' MSVC 7.1 is enough. From
cursory glances at the various redist files, I would also have to ship
the EULA, and as an end-user (of python) I can''t just redistribute the
files - perhaps I could write a place holder application in MSVC to
suggest that I was no longer an end-user, but this seems ridiculous as a
workaround.
There even seem to be ''exclude'' clauses to redistribution concerning
open-source material, but IANAL and ran from the various paragraphs.
I would like to think that python would encourage as many folk as
possible to use the language wherever it fits best (and perhaps even
beyond) and yet this is going in the opposite direction.
Would it be so difficult for a ''no legalese attached'' version to be
provided on windows, or at the very least, some kind of statement
regarding what is and isn''t allowed ? There seems nothing within the
python distribution stating the redistribution rights of the dll
(correct me if I''m wrong) which already seems contrary to the MS
requirements.
As much as I''d like to continue using it, because of the vague legal
situation, I can''t, and that''s unfortunate.
Michael.
[Michael Kearns]
[Michael Kearns]
...
另外，我不相信只是'拥有''MSVC 7.1就足够了。从粗略地浏览各种redist文件，我也必须发送EULA，作为最终用户（python），我不能只重新发布
文件 - 也许我可以在MSVC中写一个占位符应用程序来建议我不再是最终用户，但这似乎是一种荒谬的解决方法。
甚至似乎是''排除''关于开源材料再分配的条款，但IANAL并从各个段落开始。
我想认为python会鼓励像<可以在任何最适合的地方使用这种语言（甚至可能超越），但这是朝着相反的方向发展的。
对于'否legalese附带''版本是否在窗户上提供，或者至少是某种声明
关于什么是不允许的？
我认为这很难。 "我们" （Python开发人员）没有写b
写微软的许可证，没有特别的见解，并且也不是b $ b b律师。如果你想要具有法律约束力的澄清或
豁免，我认为他们必须来自微软（这是他们的
许可证）。
如果商业用户聚在一起，用
MS追求这个，并分享他们学到的东西，这将是很酷的。当然，如果没有商业MS兴趣的人这样做也会很酷，但是发生这种情况的可能性似乎为零。
在python发行版中似乎没有任何内容声明重新分配dll的权利（如果我错了，请纠正我），这似乎与MS要求相反。
这也是可能的。 MS还没有向PSF抱怨，但那是'
并不能保证他们不会。
尽可能多的我想继续使用它，因为模糊的法律情况，我不能，而且那是不幸的。
...
Also, I don''t believe that just ''owning'' MSVC 7.1 is enough. From
cursory glances at the various redist files, I would also have to ship
the EULA, and as an end-user (of python) I can''t just redistribute the
files - perhaps I could write a place holder application in MSVC to
suggest that I was no longer an end-user, but this seems ridiculous as a
workaround.
There even seem to be ''exclude'' clauses to redistribution concerning
open-source material, but IANAL and ran from the various paragraphs.
I would like to think that python would encourage as many folk as
possible to use the language wherever it fits best (and perhaps even
beyond) and yet this is going in the opposite direction.
Would it be so difficult for a ''no legalese attached'' version to be
provided on windows, or at the very least, some kind of statement
regarding what is and isn''t allowed ?
I think it would be difficult. "We" (the Python developers) didn''t
write Microsoft''s license, have no special insight wrt it, and aren''t
lawyers either. If you want legally binding clarifications or
exemptions, I think they have to come from Microsoft (it''s their
license).
It would be cool if commercial users got together, pursued this with
MS, and shared what they learned. Of course it would also be cool if
someone with no commercial MS interests did so, but the chance of that
happening seems nil.
There seems nothing within the python distribution stating the redistribution
rights of the dll (correct me if I''m wrong) which already seems contrary to the
MS requirements.
That''s possible too. MS hasn''t complained to the PSF yet, but that''s
no guarantee they won''t.
As much as I''d like to continue using it, because of the vague legal
situation, I can''t, and that''s unfortunate.
也许Python商业论坛可以采取这个？我不知道
他们是否仍然活跃，他们的网站今天不工作（至少不是我的b $ b）：
http://www.python-in-business.org/
如果有人自愿做这项工作，那么PSF支付也是可能的（而不是确定）律师时间。
Maybe the Python Business Forum could take this on? I don''t know
whether they''re still active, and their site isn''t working today (at
least not for me):
http://www.python-in-business.org/
If someone(s) volunteered to do the work, it''s also possible (not
certain) that the PSF would pay for lawyer time.
这篇关于Python 2.4杀死商业Windows Python开发？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
