Re: [gnugo-devel] endgame module for GNU Go

[Eric]

--- Paul Pogonyshev <address@hidden> wrote:

> Eric wrote:
> 
> > > Are you interested in getting it into
> > > the mainline GNU Go
> > > or do you regard it as a private research
> project?
> > 
> > Not really sure what you mean by this, but I'll
> take a
> > stab at it:
> > 
> > The Semsyn engine itself has already been
> completed,
> > and is proprietary. However, most planning systems
> > being developed these days adhere to the
> "standard"
> > PDDL (Planning Domain Definition Language) which
> > originated from Yale University.
> > 
> > If GNU Go treats the planner as a black box, then
> it
> > is not necessary to distribute the planner as
> integral
> > to the GNU Go engine. Users of GNU Go can simply
> > "plug-in" their favorite flavor of planner.
> 
> This does not sound acceptable.  While GNU GPL
> allows
> communicating with a proprietary program (i.e. when
> that
> program is a separate process), there is a number of
> serious technical and other problems:
> 
> * We cannot distribute your program (it is
> proprietary)
>   along with GNU Go.

There are lots of free planners available. Try to
Google 'AI Planning Systems', since you obviously have
not done this.

> * We cannot even put links to your program, because
> GNU
>   servers don't advertise proprietary software.
> 
> * I don't think it is worth the inconvenience of
> plugging
>   in a planner into GNU Go.

Yea, unless it makes GNU Go useful for something
besides your own personal entertainment.

> Most users would not
> even
>   know what a planner was and that GNU Go had a use
> for
>   one.

Duh. That's the whole purpose of the effort. Nobody
knew what personal computers were useful for either,
until Bill Gates starting building them.

> We hardly want to make GNU Go depend on
> another
>   program (even if optionally) other than a GUI.

Why not?

> > The bulk of the work being proposed currently
> involves
> > writing the endgame module and modelling the Go
> > domain, i.e. designing the domain operators. And
> yes,
> > I intend to leave these pieces in the public
> domain
> > (or free, or whatever is the proper terminology).
> 
> As far as I understood, this endgame module would
> essentially be an interface to a planner.

Very good.

> Then, as I
> explained above, without a free software planner
> which
> can be compiled into GNU Go, this is hardly of any
> use.

I already addressed this above.

> In general, your program's being proprietory is the
> show stopper.

No it's not.

> I understand that you will not change
> your license because of this, but we cannot change
> our
> policy either.

That's your loss.