|51 earlier messages|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 25, 2011 11:08 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 25, 2011 11:31 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 25, 2011 12:38 pm|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 25, 2011 12:44 pm|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 25, 2011 12:47 pm|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 25, 2011 2:02 pm|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 25, 2011 2:08 pm|
|Simon Wise||Oct 25, 2011 5:51 pm|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 25, 2011 6:53 pm|
|Simon Wise||Oct 25, 2011 7:32 pm|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 25, 2011 8:27 pm|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 25, 2011 9:26 pm|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 25, 2011 9:28 pm|
|Marvin Humphrey||Oct 25, 2011 10:20 pm|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 25, 2011 11:04 pm|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 25, 2011 11:08 pm|
|Max||Oct 26, 2011 12:54 am|
|Simon Wise||Oct 26, 2011 3:40 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 26, 2011 7:54 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 26, 2011 7:58 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 26, 2011 8:09 am|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 26, 2011 9:42 am|
|Ricardo Fabbri||Oct 26, 2011 12:03 pm|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 26, 2011 12:22 pm|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 26, 2011 1:48 pm|
|Simon Wise||Oct 26, 2011 6:26 pm|
|Simon Wise||Oct 26, 2011 6:34 pm|
|Roman Haefeli||Oct 27, 2011 1:04 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 27, 2011 1:52 am|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 27, 2011 2:39 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 27, 2011 3:00 am|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 27, 2011 3:17 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 27, 2011 7:15 am|
|Pierre Massat||Oct 27, 2011 7:26 am|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 27, 2011 8:01 am|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 30, 2011 12:52 am|
|Rick||Oct 30, 2011 3:57 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 30, 2011 8:42 am|
|Georg Bosch||Oct 30, 2011 2:39 pm|
|Andy Farnell||Oct 30, 2011 4:22 pm|
|i go bananas||Oct 31, 2011 7:49 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Oct 31, 2011 7:55 am|
|Hans-Christoph Steiner||Oct 31, 2011 7:58 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 31, 2011 8:04 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 31, 2011 8:20 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Oct 31, 2011 8:31 am|
|i go bananas||Oct 31, 2011 8:37 am|
|Olivier B||Nov 2, 2011 5:01 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Nov 2, 2011 7:03 am|
|Olivier B||Nov 3, 2011 4:49 pm|
|i go bananas||Nov 4, 2011 12:28 am|
|Olivier B||Nov 4, 2011 1:29 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Nov 4, 2011 7:16 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Nov 4, 2011 8:29 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Nov 4, 2011 8:39 am|
|Jonathan Wilkes||Nov 4, 2011 8:51 am|
|Mathieu Bouchard||Nov 4, 2011 9:32 am|
|Andy Farnell||Nov 4, 2011 1:19 pm|
|Subject:||Re: [PD] expr alternative|
|From:||Olivier B (lamo...@gmail.com)|
|Date:||Nov 3, 2011 4:49:55 pm|
2011/11/2 Jonathan Wilkes <janc...@yahoo.com>
________________________________ From: Olivier B <lamo...@gmail.com> To: i go bananas <hard...@gmail.com> Cc: PD-List <pd-l...@iem.at> Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative
Just to say that, even if my patchs are published under GPL, as I
definitely need my lines to be straight (or not aliased), I would prefer [expr] to be under BSD, like Pd-Vanilla is...
What does the license have to do with straight lines and aliasing?
I've certainly done a private joke only to myself... :-/ I just wanted to say that I like my Pd patches to be tidy... to have their lines (or wires, I don't know the word used in english) perfectly straight... And for the same reason, it disturbs me to know that Pd-vanilla doesn't offers the same license for all of its code... it makes disorder... (but don't worry for me... every day, I'm getting better (damed, how it's hard to try to make humor in a foreign language :-p ) )
2011/10/31 i go bananas <hard...@gmail.com>
that's what i have just asked about.
if you read back about halfway up the thread, max posted a mail saying that IRCAM are willing to change the license to LGPL.
so i'm now wondering, that of course it is a hassle to contact all the
original authors, but if none of them have moral views against BSD, then maybe that would be an easier course of action that code rewrite.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <janc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wouldn't you need to get permission from Ircam, too?
They are listed as a copyrightholder, for example, in vexp.c.
There is also the following list of authors: * Authors: Maurizio De Cecco, Francois Dechelle, Enzo Maggi, Norbert Schnell.
________________________________ From: i go bananas <hard...@gmail.com> To: Hans-Christoph Steiner <ha...@at.or.at> Cc: PD-List <pd-l...@iem.at>; Georg Bosch <kr...@stillavailable.com> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative
i just got a reply and they are reviewing my question, so hopefully we can find out if they currently allow LGPL.
however, even if the do, i PERSONALLY still think a BSD [expr] would be much better.
i know there were a lot of heated comments in this thread defending
GPL, but if the author of the object would prefer to go with BSD, and if all that keeps him from doing the work is a little time and motivation, well, i can't really give him any time, but i can maybe help with motivation.
restrictions to be placed on the code. The VLC and GNU Go complaints as I understood them were specifically about the Apple App Store placing additional restrictions on the code. So that would affect LGPL and GPL alike. An app that includes some LGPL code might be a grey area since there is no possible expectation of producing a binary exactly like the original, since not all the code's licenses require that, so distributing the LGPL part separate might be enough.
With the GPL, the whole app needs to be GPL compatible, so therefore
there is an easy test: every user must be able to freely recreate the binary, and freely install, run, and modify it. That's something that the Apple App Store definitely restricts.
I don't think this will really be resolved until Apple drops those terms or the FSF makes a statement on the LGPL in the Apple App Store.
On Oct 31, 2011, at 10:49 AM, i go bananas wrote:
i just called a couple of apple numbers. first one had me on hold for 10 minutes so i gave up, 2nd one was useless.
BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and
she has issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system at least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code in iOS applications.
Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making high profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK. it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do. As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement. You just need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it.
Will keep hammering away here. LGPL sounds like it might be a
better option, but i still reckon if Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that would be the best outcome.
Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even
to see a unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like i may get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to bum my goldfish.
Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon
though, [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in so many patches.
You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie
-- Envie de tisser ? http://yamatierea.org/papatchs/
-- Envie de tisser ? http://yamatierea.org/papatchs/