Clarification: LGPL v2 YES, LGPL v3 NO :D -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/> > On Nov 7, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Dan Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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] >> <mailto:[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
