Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Fruit Reykjavic

Author: Christos Gitsis

Date: 11:43:39 08/24/05

Go up one level in this thread


On August 24, 2005 at 06:04:33, Frank Mueller wrote:

>On August 24, 2005 at 04:10:36, Fabien Letouzey wrote:
>
>>There is also the insufficiency (IMO) of the GPL in the chess case that I have
>>to ponder on (pun intended).
>
>I don't understand that. You deliberately decided to publish under GPL, thus all
>consequences were/are conceivable. And publishing under GPL doesn't imply that
>you -- as author of Fruit -- have to waive all your rights.
>
>Frank

In June, when Fruit 2.1 was released, Shredder was undisputed number 1 and about
100 elo stronger than any free engine. Fritz, Junior, Hiarcs etc were also
clearly stronger than the free engines (perhaps with the exception of Toga II
0.93).

It was not conceivable to me at that time that two months later there would have
appeared so many new strong engines that there is no knowing which one is the
strongest. But this is the current situation, and it probably is not irrelevant
to the prior release of Fruit 2.1.

Obviously a program released under the GPL is vulnerable to people who take and
don't give back (ideas). Not everyone is interested in sharing of ideas and
progress of computer chess - some people are just interested in making their
engine as strong as they can. And there is no way to know if the programmers of
closed-source engines have taken ideas out of Fruit, which combined with their
own ideas give them an advantage.

All the above really give a lot to ponder on, and I can understand Fabien's
decision.

I would like to add that I am a fan of open-source software and a Linux user.




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.