Even if they want to statically link fribidi, they can do that under the LGPL license. All they have to do is to provide means for other people to create a version of putty that has a different fribidi implementation. As putty is open source itself, that requirement is always met.
Is there something I'm missing here?
Shachar
I checked my old archives yesterday and I found that I still have the very first releases of fribidi where I was the sole contributor. I personally have no problem releasing these under a putty compatible licence. It would save Ahmed some work if he didn't have to reimplement this. I think it would be good to rename the sources though so that there is no confusion with fribidi.
Do you have anything against it, Behdad?
What it would give you:
* A complete (but probably somewhat buggy) implementation of the implicit unicode bidi algorithm.
* No support for explicit overrides (but, hey, would use those in a terminal emulator!)
* Less than optimal speed wise. No sophisticated lookup (neither two-level nor nine-level. ;-)
Regards,
Dov
-- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Systems Consulting http://www.lingnu.com/
_______________________________________________ Developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/developer
