On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:44:47AM -0700, Johan Hake wrote: > On Monday August 22 2011 10:39:33 Anders Logg wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:22:44AM -0700, Johan Hake wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > A recent email discussion with Andre made me aware (again) of the > > > incompatability between QPL and GPL. Not sure we have settled this > > > issued, but > > > > > > I googled it and found the following link: > > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > > > > > > scroll down to QPL. Here they suggest the following solution: > > > However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library > > > (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, > > > you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program > > > > > > by adding a notice like this to it: > > > As a special exception, you have permission to link this > > > program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as > > > long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard > > > to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. > > > > > > You can do this, legally, if you are the copyright holder for the > > > program. Add it in the source files, after the notice that says the > > > program is covered by the GNU GPL. > > > > > > For this to work all copyright holders need to agree. Not sure we need > > > another author content process to use this solution though. > > > > Andre also mentioned to me that we actually don't need those special > > QPL pieces of CGAL (but can use GTS instead with improved efficiency) > > so it might not be a problem. Andre knows more about this. > > Then we "just" need to reimplement that part... Sounds tedious.
I think Andre has already done that, more or less. -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
