On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 15:08 -0400, Enrique Erne wrote: > Anton Hörnquist wrote: > > > > In my view jon~ is open source so feel free to use it in any way. I'm > > not sure how to... well.. document this. What's the best and simplest > > way? Should I write something about it in the help patch? What license > > should I use - GPL? Any hints about this are appreciated. :) > > i'd like to see the purepd project having the same licence as puredata. >
I think BSD-style would be better than GPL, which seems a bit inappropriate for Pd abstractions with its emphasis on linkage and source vs binary distributions etc which don't really apply. Personally, I vote for these patches being public domain, PD patches for Pd! Frank B has argued for this in the past, and I think its quite convincing. Jamie -- www.postlude.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamiebullock _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
