Hi, On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 22:21:50 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 12/07/2014 10:05 PM, Tim Harder wrote: > > On 2014-12-07 15:02, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > >>>> The most important consumer is app-text/pdftk Unfortunately, > >>>> there is still no replacement for the latter which works as > >>>> good, especially if you have tricky pdfs to process. Loosing > >>>> gcj would therefore be a real loss. > >>> As long as you're fine with any command-line pdf processing > >>> tool, you could use app-text/cpdf which I've used for a long > >>> time and just added to the tree. Note that it's licensed under > >>> a non-commercial type license though. > > > >> Why would we want to replace a working GPL-2 application for an > >> application under a non-free license? As one of the users of > >> app-text/pdftk I'm not a big supporter of this (although I have > >> not looked into mcpdf as was brought up earlier in this thread, > >> although that as well seems to be under a more restrictive AGPL-3 > >> license). > > > > I'm not saying it's a replacement, it's an alternative. Also, some > > of us are less picky about licensing issues as long as the source > > code is available and free for personal use. :) > > By all means, thanks for informing about an alternative, but I > personally believe that it is important for the overall distribution > to keep a wider perspective than personal non-free use (even if this > is a developers primary focus as reason for contribution), otherwise > we'll hit a wall quickly enough. > > In this specific case I at least use pdftk for some batch jobs on > business-related servers and a non-commercial license would not be > viable.
Seconded here. Now and then I use pdftk for some conversions for my job, so non-commercial licensed alternative is a no go. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgpdQU5QbXP7u.pgp
Description: PGP signature
