Frequently Asked Questions
The empty namespaces are for the most part representative of the parts of the framework
which are either only available under a commercial license or simply have not been released
They are there so that you can see whats missing...
Some of the namespaces, like , and
will probably be released under the GPL once ive tidied
them up and sorted out all the issues.
I deliberately wanted to keep the size and complexity of the first release to a minimum.
Reason comes with a standard makefile for use with GNU make on Unix/Linux/BSD and a visual studio
project file for Windows XP/NT/2000. But you can also set up your own project using an environment
like Eclipse very easily.
All the source code to Reason is in a single /src folder, and the libraries
are also easily accessible in /lib/name/lib and /lib/name/include.
If your using the makefile, the default target builds an executable. But you will need to build the
dependencies first using "make depend". To build a library use "make library".
It should build on any version of GCC > 3.3. Use "gcc --version" to check which
version you have.
Drop me an email with your code or suggestions.
But please be aware that this is a work in progress. Whilst i am working out the details of the
dual licensing scheme i would have to ask that you revoke any copyright that you have over contributions
that you make.
In the future i would like to be able to offer a percentage of any income, say 10-20% to an open source
organisation such as the Free Software Foundation in exchange for copyright.
I know this is a delicate issue, but i think its unusual for a framework like this to be produced by
one person and i have to juggle my desire to go open source with the need to pay my rent and uphold
existing commercial commitments which have allowed me to get where i am.
I don't have a day job, i am lucky enough that this is what i do full time.
The plan at the moment is use a flat rate license of around 10
pounds (GBP) per individual/employee per year.
Yes, that is extremely cheap.
This model keeps the commercial code very close to being donation ware
for most users. Only large corporations would pay hefty fees, and for
open source purists hopefully it is so close to being spare change
that it will not scare you away.
Licenses would be non-transferable and fees would not change without 1 years notice. And of course, they would
always be negotiable if a fixed price is required for long term projects.
But feel free to give me your comments and suggestions if you don't like this scheme.