Author: Thomas Gaksch
Date: 10:43:45 03/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2005 at 03:22:06, Gabor Szots wrote: >Do you agree that after giving you due credit Toga's "author" can claim that >"his" engine is his own intellectual product and can be called a new engine? hi all, i do not want to have credit for toga and i never said that ist is "my" engine. toga is 97% fruit. fabien is the one who should become credit for his program. he had a lot of work with fruit. he made fruit so strong. he is a great guy and programmer. it seems so, that i had the luck to find a way to "improve" fruit a little bit. why shouldn´t some testers also test toga. it ist the only possibility to find out if the extensions i made are useful. you are right if you think that the name is a problem. but everywhere i write something, i pointed out that it is based on fruit. also if you execute the exe-file there shows a message "Toga II 0.93 based on Fruit 2.0". also the readme pointed it out. i made the changes in fruit only for fun. after 12 years without chess programming i was keen on programming. i would never have the time to program a engine from the scratch. so my only chance was to use an open source program. i only can say it over and over again that the credit should receive FABIEN. i made the changes just for fun. but if someone liks also toga i think it is no shame. Thomas
This page took 0.01 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.