Author: milix
Date: 01:35:58 04/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 31, 2005 at 19:59:06, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >On March 31, 2005 at 18:54:01, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>>Absolutely agreed! Admitting to be a cloner doesn't make it better IMO. >>>Even if the few code changes (simple ones on a high level) really have >>>an impact of around 40-50 ELO, I am quite sure Fabien would have >>>tried the same techniques sooner or later, _if_ he had the time, but AFAIK >>>he has very little time currently in developing Fruit. >>>IMO the 'Toga extensions' just robbed Fruit's future... >> >>Perhaps they modifications will be contributed back to the core. >> >>That would have been more sensible in the first place. >> >>IMO-YMMV. > >That would have been the right thing to do. Especially for such a young program >as fruit, it makes not a lot of senses to make some changes to the source and >introduce it as a separate entity to tournaments. > > >regards >Andy Why? This is not in the copyright of the Fruit. Toga is a totally legal engine for me and stands for its own. It mentions that is a derivative of Fruit and also releases its source code, all according to GPL. This also doesn't heart Fabien or else he wouldn't release the source code. This is the way I understand his words in his post in this thread.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.