Actually, as I recall, LGPL is kosher *if* you also publish the source code so users can rebuild the software. Isn’t this correct Jonathan? At least that was how I was approaching PdParty.
-------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/> > On Nov 7, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Dan Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, this is correct. I was wrong in the last mail. > > Since the externals are built and linked when building libpd as iOS doesn’t > allow dynamic linking, there’s no way to satisfy the distribution clause in > the LGPL. I was thinking about *abstraction* libraries earlier which are OK > as long as you can allow users to update them. I do this in PdParty by > exposing the lib folder and make it easy to swap in new versions of those > files. Of course this works since they are not binary compiled libraries. > > I was hoping for expr adopting a BSD license for this issue, but I also > understand if the authors choose not to. I’m pretty sure everything else > distributed in the pd vanilla sources is BSD. > > Also, I’m sure there are apps running with expr~ etc in the App Store. You > only have to add those files to your build tree when building libpd and call > their setup function. I doubt there is a automatic mechanism Apple is using > to detect such things. > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika> > danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> > robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/> >> On Nov 7, 2015, at 1:08 PM, [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: "Scott R. Looney" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Date: November 7, 2015 at 12:24:44 PM MST >> To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: Re: [PD] looking for other vanilla filters or abstractions for libPD >> >> >> thanks Jonathan. this is what i assumed re LGPL when i saw a discussion >> about using fluidsynth in a build, which has a LGPL variant but not anything >> more permissive. so one question would be if anyone here on the list had a >> paid app rejected or accepted on the App Store due to using an LGPL license? >> expr and expr~ are very useful for a variety of things but for now i'm not >> using them due to this offchance. >> >> i would further guess that FSF's exact words on LGPL were probably pretty >> dark on using the iTunes Store in general. i've seen some announcements from >> them in the past that made it clear how they feel about walled gardens. >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
