[ts-general] Struggling to create.sql

R P Herrold herrold at owlriver.com
Thu Jun 30 10:34:54 EDT 2011

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Richard Pruss wrote:

> The git on github would be great. Then those like myself who 
> do not feel up to contributing to the great depths of Bill's 
> C++ can at contribute minor branches for things like the 
> Makefile, the doc and minor bits like the API level in the 
> test script etc.

Bill and I had planned this 'opening up' of the shim 
once we hit the 1.0 release, and as I am now back at the 
office, I am following up on the plan.  Also, Red Hat has 
(finally) significantly liberalized its 'terms of 
participation document for its 'Fedora Project', from an older 
one called the CLA [1], to a new one called a FPCA [2]

---------------start disclaimer-------------------

I_A_AL, but not your lawyer.  I offer legal advice and formal
opinion only within the confines of a previously  established 
and explicit attorney-client relationship where privilege may 
be had;  and NEVER on a public list server.

----------------end disclaimers ------------------

The old CLA had nasty representations and indemnification 
language which had scared me away from participating in that 
project as a registered member; the new FPCA does not have 
matter I found objectionable, from a preliminary review.  I 
will be formally reviewing the FPCA in the upcoming weeks, and 
I will consider grafting it into the contributions license 
used by the dual-licensed shim (the shim is GPLv3+ as to 
externally released code drops, and capable of non-GPL 
licensed release by the copyright holder, for our commercial 

Some background: From day one, we, trading-shim LLC, [the .com 
side] are well willing to private license custom versions, and 
have done so as part of our support of the shim for private 
clients (usually as to code add-ons containing hedge fund 
proprietary trading extended functions).  To continue to be 
able to do so, we need to make sure we have a clear copyright 
assignment on any code or non-code matter (doco) we accept 
into the shim's mainline trunk [the .org side].  We merge code 
and features from private branches into the public trunk 
whenever possible, once the code has been genericized, and 
anticipate continuing to do so

We also hold, but have not widely used, the .net side domain 
name.  We anticipated that an ecosystem would emerge of third 
parties building extension modules for the shim.  This has 
been slow to build, but we remain hopeful.  Such ecosystem 
would be potentially GPLv3+, OR potentially needing a private 
license.  That extension writer would be eligible to obtain a 
.net email address, and a sub-domain under trading-shim.net 
under license (sort of an 'authorized franchise' indicia), and 
to co-participate, producing both GPLv3+ code as well as 
selling private strategy consulting. Our hope has always been 
that the community _would_ so participate

> I am clueless about the law, so excuse me if I am wrong but 
> would GPLv3+ not stop companies from using the shim as if a 
> company changed shim to do a trading system with it and made 
> money they could be forced to publish their non-shim related 
> code?

See the indication above as to legal advice.  NOTHING in the 
GPLs prevents making money with code lincensed under them. 

Indeed, Richard Stallman has a very good presentation to this 

A third party using the shim is required to make available 
access to the sources for the provided product (this is done 
with our FTP site, already, and we will maintain this 
indefinitely, so a person need not separately maintain a local 
FTP site when they are distributing binaries made from a 
publicly availalbe shim tarball)

The shim is intentionally designed to communicate across a 
defined textual interface, so it acts like a binary linkable 
library.  There is NO REQUIREMENT to release the 'driving 
scripts' that feed commands into the shim, as there is not 
'linking' of the shim occurring

If a person feels the shim lacks a given command available in 
the TWS-API in textual form, please raise the issue here, and 
let's discuss how to extend the shim to include it for 
everyone in the GPLv3+ trunk. [We have intentionally not 
included FA handlers (we have not seen a demand for such), and 
have not tested certain bond and warrant code paths (for lack 
of demand and domain knowledge on how to test such)]

As to 'driving scripts', as you know, Bill and I have both 
published several of our local trading and history retrieval 
scripts into the mailing list.  There is no reason not to add 
a 'contribs' directory, and collect a wide range of code 
demonstrating what the shim can do, said scripts being 
genericized in a fashion that does not disclose proprietary 
trading knowledge or techniques ...

A sample application showing history retrieval into the 
database as a temporary store, Bollinger Ban computation from 
such data, and emitting orders on mean reversion strategy, is 
less than 100 lines of scripting to emit the needed textual 

The trick is to know when to use it of course  ;)

> The company I work for, by example (nothing to do with 
> trading) has a blanket ban on any project using any GPLv3 
> code.

noted, but as such, are you not already 'crosswise' to that, 
as the shim is GPLv3+ already ?

Best regards

-- Russ herrold

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses/CLA
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement#FPCA_Text

More information about the ts-general mailing list