On Sunday 03 January 2010 17:35:04 Paul Davis wrote: > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Bob Ham <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, to compare Mixbus and Ubuntu, I would look at these pages: > > > > 1. http://www.ubuntu.com/community/participate/developerzone > > > > which explains to users that they are welcome to participate in > > development and provides pointers to specific information; > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ardour > > > > which contains links to the Ardour home page and Ubuntu source code > > packages; and > > > > 3. http://za.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/a/ardour/ > > > > which offers both binaries and source code (this is equivalent to > > distributing the source code along with the binaries in the GPL 2.) > > None of these links will be presented to a user who installs Ardour > using aptitude, apt-get or any GUI front end for these tools. None of > them will be presented to a user who runs Ardour on their Ubuntu > system either. Neither will the GPL license of Ardour be presented to > the user (that will vanish into their X log file). In short, the user > will have no clue about the license status unless they have enough > knowledge of Ubuntu to know that most of its apps are GPL and how to > check that.
Do you want to consider mentioning the license in the initial Session Control screen? And a bit more info on the License screen from the About screen? I don't think that would be in any way out of line and would make the info a bit more visible. all the best, drew _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
