Hi, that incriminiated 'should' means that people are 'morally obliged' to cite the use of MeshLab. not legally obliged. In a previous version of the meshlab home page
http://web.archive.org/web/20060519105745/http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/ it was better specified. I will re specify in that way. I think that these conditions pass without any problem the ten guidelines of DFSG and even the desert island test. Now a more technichal question. For meshlab, I use qmake as a portable building system. Is that considered a sufficiently good replacemnte of automake/autoconf (i have never used them from a developer point of view only as a dumb installer)? P. On 5/9/07, Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/9/07, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just read in the project's webpage that > > Remember that, whenever you use MeshLab in a official/commercial > project or in any kind of research, you should: > > * Explicitly cite in your work that you have used MeshLab, a tool > developed with the support of the Epoch NOE, > * Post a couple of lines in the users' forum describing the > project where MeshLab was used. > > This may be a DFSG issue (fails the desert island test?). I guess it would depend on whether the "should" above is intended to be legally binding. If not, for reasons of clarification it might be a good idea for upstream to rewrite this text to read something like the following. "The authors of MeshLab would appreciate it if, whenever you use MeshLab in an official/commercial project or in any kind of research, you would: [skip bullet points] However, this is not a legally binding obligation." If the text *is* meant to be legally binding, then I agree, it sounds non-DFSG-free. best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]