Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 23:03:13 03/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2004 at 01:56:39, stegner, jamie wrote: >acc. to their resumes. stuart regards himself as the original author; while john >does not. if memory serves me right, john once called(or let it be called) his >work "gnuchess 2". > >my rationale on this question is: > >HOW CAN ANYONE BE REGARDED AS THE ORiGiNAL AUTHOR WITHOUT ANY PROGRAM OR SOURCE >FILE AVAILABLE ON THE NET AND NO BODY HAS EVER CLAIMED HE'S SEEN A COPY OR HE >OWNS ONE. > >as u know various doc files included in gnuchess packages are writtten by john. >maybe he posted them w/ other gnuchess files; and i have never read nor found >any doc file on gnuchess programming skills written by stuart. > >but many packages attribute (c) to stuart cracraft. john stanback, daryl baker, >mike mcgann... why he is the first on the list? > >was stuart's result was UN-offical? it really existed as working program? > >PS) imho, without regard to (c) notices, the 1st on the list should be john. > >best // jamie This doesn't answer Ricardo's question: why not ask them by email? Andrew Williams
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.