subject:"Re\: \[PD\] expr alternative"

i just called a couple of apple numbers.  first one had me on hold for 10
minutes so i  gave up, 2nd one was useless.

BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and she has
issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system at
least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code in
iOS applications.

Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making high
profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.
it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to
release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do.
As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement.  You just
need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it.

Will keep hammering away here.  LGPL sounds like it might be a better
option, but i still reckon if **Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that
would be the best outcome.
Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even to see a
unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like i may
get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to bum my
goldfish.

Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon though,
[expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in so many
patches.
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-31 Thread Mathieu Bouchard


Le 2011-10-31 à 23:49:00, i go bananas a écrit :

Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making 
high profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.  
it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to 
release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to 
do.


But people do use GPL software on Microsoft Windows, often using MinGW, 
which uses Microsoft's libc and other nonfree things. So, what are the 
difference(s) there ?


Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon 
though, [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up 
in so many patches.


Though [fexpr~] crashes in various circumstances that seem to revolve 
around trying to use 10 outlets or close to that (I won't try to debug 
it).


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-31 Thread Hans-Christoph Steiner


Another side of it is that the GPL and LGPL do not allow additional 
restrictions to be placed on the code.  The VLC and GNU Go complaints as I 
understood them were specifically about the Apple App Store placing additional 
restrictions on the code.  So that would affect LGPL and GPL alike.  An app 
that includes some LGPL code might be a grey area since there is no possible 
expectation of producing a binary exactly like the original, since not all the 
code's licenses require that, so distributing the LGPL part separate might be 
enough.  

With the GPL, the whole app needs to be GPL compatible, so therefore there is 
an easy test: every user must be able to freely recreate the binary, and freely 
install, run, and modify it.  That's something that the Apple App Store 
definitely restricts.

I don't think this will really be resolved until Apple drops those terms or the 
FSF makes a statement on the LGPL in the Apple App Store.

.hc

On Oct 31, 2011, at 10:49 AM, i go bananas wrote:

 i just called a couple of apple numbers.  first one had me on hold for 10 
 minutes so i  gave up, 2nd one was useless.
 
 BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and she has 
 issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system at 
 least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code in iOS 
 applications.
 
 Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making high 
 profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.  
 it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to 
 release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do.
 As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement.  You just 
 need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it. 
 
 Will keep hammering away here.  LGPL sounds like it might be a better option, 
 but i still reckon if Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that would be the 
 best outcome.  
 Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even to see a 
 unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like i may 
 get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to bum my 
 goldfish.  
 
 Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon though, 
 [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in so many 
 patches.
 
 
 
 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list






You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear it, 
you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

i just got a reply and they are reviewing my question, so hopefully we can
find out if they currently allow LGPL.

however, even if the do, i PERSONALLY still think a BSD [expr] would be
much better.

i know there were a lot of heated comments in this thread defending GPL,
but if the author of the object would prefer to go with BSD, and if all
that keeps him from doing the work is a little time and motivation, well, i
can't really give him any time, but i can maybe help with motivation.

Am i on my own if i try to do that?



On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.atwrote:


 Another side of it is that the GPL and LGPL do not allow additional
 restrictions to be placed on the code.  The VLC and GNU Go complaints as I
 understood them were specifically about the Apple App Store placing
 additional restrictions on the code.  So that would affect LGPL and GPL
 alike.  An app that includes some LGPL code might be a grey area since
 there is no possible expectation of producing a binary exactly like the
 original, since not all the code's licenses require that, so distributing
 the LGPL part separate might be enough.

 With the GPL, the whole app needs to be GPL compatible, so therefore there
 is an easy test: every user must be able to freely recreate the binary, and
 freely install, run, and modify it.  That's something that the Apple App
 Store definitely restricts.

 I don't think this will really be resolved until Apple drops those terms
 or the FSF makes a statement on the LGPL in the Apple App Store.

 .hc

 On Oct 31, 2011, at 10:49 AM, i go bananas wrote:

  i just called a couple of apple numbers.  first one had me on hold for
 10 minutes so i  gave up, 2nd one was useless.
 
  BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and she
 has issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system
 at least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code
 in iOS applications.
 
  Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making
 high profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.
  it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to
 release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do.
  As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement.  You
 just need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it.
 
  Will keep hammering away here.  LGPL sounds like it might be a better
 option, but i still reckon if Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that
 would be the best outcome.
  Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even to
 see a unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like
 i may get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to
 bum my goldfish.
 
  Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon
 though, [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in
 so many patches.
 
 
 
  ___
  Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
  UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list





 

 You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear
 it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

also, i think i am going to get slapped around the face again for this,

but how impossible would it be to get IRCAM to grant a BSD license for the
certain section of code used in [expr] ?

i know people here are going to disagree, and yes, i can see your point,
but look at this:

jMax is a new implementation of the MAX software written originally by
Miller Puckette at Ircam.

surely that means something???

i still think a license tweak is going to be a much more feasible option
than having the [expr] code re-written



maybe i should just drop this?  as i said in an offshoot thread, there's no
personal benefit here for me here.  I just use pd on my own computer at
home right now, so even if i want to sample the entire metallica back
catalogue and set it to copyrighted videos of madonna, no one is going to
care.  However, i just know from my experience doing an iPhone app 2,
nearly 3 years ago, that if i could have used [expr~] it would have been a
lot smoother.
A unified license, at least for vanilla PD seems like the way to go
though.  I know [expr~] is an external, and from what people are saying
about float handling and whatnot, it sounds like it should stay that way;
but it has been part of the standard pd distribution for over 10 years now,
and it just seems like it'd all be cooler if it were one package, one
license.
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-31 Thread Jonathan Wilkes

Wouldn't you need to get permission from Ircam, too?

They are listed as a copyrightholder, for example, in vexp.c.

There is also the following list of authors:
* Authors: Maurizio De Cecco, Francois Dechelle, Enzo Maggi, Norbert Schnell.

-Jonathan





From: i go bananas hard@gmail.com
To: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at
Cc: PD-List pd-list@iem.at; Georg Bosch k...@stillavailable.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative


i just got a reply and they are reviewing my question, so hopefully we can 
find out if they currently allow LGPL.

however, even if the do, i PERSONALLY still think a BSD [expr] would be much 
better.

i know there were a lot of heated comments in this thread defending GPL, but 
if the author of the object would prefer to go with BSD, and if all that keeps 
him from doing the work is a little time and motivation, well, i can't really 
give him any time, but i can maybe help with motivation.

Am i on my own if i try to do that?




On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at wrote:


Another side of it is that the GPL and LGPL do not allow additional 
restrictions to be placed on the code.  The VLC and GNU Go complaints as I 
understood them were specifically about the Apple App Store placing 
additional restrictions on the code.  So that would affect LGPL and GPL 
alike.  An app that includes some LGPL code might be a grey area since there 
is no possible expectation of producing a binary exactly like the original, 
since not all the code's licenses require that, so distributing the LGPL part 
separate might be enough.

With the GPL, the whole app needs to be GPL compatible, so therefore there is 
an easy test: every user must be able to freely recreate the binary, and 
freely install, run, and modify it.  That's something that the Apple App 
Store definitely restricts.

I don't think this will really be resolved until Apple drops those terms or 
the FSF makes a statement on the LGPL in the Apple App Store.

.hc


On Oct 31, 2011, at 10:49 AM, i go bananas wrote:

 i just called a couple of apple numbers.  first one had me on hold for 10 
 minutes so i  gave up, 2nd one was useless.

 BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and she has 
 issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system at 
 least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code in 
 iOS applications.

 Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making high 
 profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.
 it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to 
 release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do.
 As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement.  You just 
 need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it.

 Will keep hammering away here.  LGPL sounds like it might be a better 
 option, but i still reckon if Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that 
 would be the best outcome.
 Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even to see a 
 unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like i may 
 get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to bum my 
 goldfish.

 Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon though, 
 [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in so many 
 patches.




 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list






You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear 
it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie





___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

that's what i have just asked about.

if you read back about halfway up the thread, max posted a mail saying that
IRCAM are willing to change the license to LGPL.

so i'm now wondering, that of course it is a hassle to contact all the
original authors, but if none of them have moral views against BSD, then
maybe that would be an easier course of action that code rewrite.



On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Wouldn't you need to get permission from Ircam, too?

 They are listed as a copyright holder, for example, in vexp.c.

 There is also the following list of authors:
 * Authors: Maurizio De Cecco, Francois Dechelle, Enzo Maggi, Norbert
 Schnell.

 -Jonathan

 --
 *From:* i go bananas hard@gmail.com
 *To:* Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at
 *Cc:* PD-List pd-list@iem.at; Georg Bosch k...@stillavailable.com
 *Sent:* Monday, October 31, 2011 11:04 AM

 *Subject:* Re: [PD] expr alternative

 i just got a reply and they are reviewing my question, so hopefully we can
 find out if they currently allow LGPL.

 however, even if the do, i PERSONALLY still think a BSD [expr] would be
 much better.

 i know there were a lot of heated comments in this thread defending GPL,
 but if the author of the object would prefer to go with BSD, and if all
 that keeps him from doing the work is a little time and motivation, well, i
 can't really give him any time, but i can maybe help with motivation.

 Am i on my own if i try to do that?



 On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.atwrote:


 Another side of it is that the GPL and LGPL do not allow additional
 restrictions to be placed on the code.  The VLC and GNU Go complaints as I
 understood them were specifically about the Apple App Store placing
 additional restrictions on the code.  So that would affect LGPL and GPL
 alike.  An app that includes some LGPL code might be a grey area since
 there is no possible expectation of producing a binary exactly like the
 original, since not all the code's licenses require that, so distributing
 the LGPL part separate might be enough.

 With the GPL, the whole app needs to be GPL compatible, so therefore there
 is an easy test: every user must be able to freely recreate the binary, and
 freely install, run, and modify it.  That's something that the Apple App
 Store definitely restricts.

 I don't think this will really be resolved until Apple drops those terms
 or the FSF makes a statement on the LGPL in the Apple App Store.

 .hc

 On Oct 31, 2011, at 10:49 AM, i go bananas wrote:

  i just called a couple of apple numbers.  first one had me on hold for
 10 minutes so i  gave up, 2nd one was useless.
 
  BUT third one was a rather helpful lady whose name i now have and she
 has issued me a 'case number' so my question is now listed in their system
 at least, so hopefully i can get the 'yay or nay' from apple on LGPL code
 in iOS applications.
 
  Also, i have already contacted a friend who works for a company making
 high profile iOS applications, and from what he is saying LGPL is OK.
  it seems the main problem with plain GPL is that apple doesn't want to
 release their own surrounding code, which the GPL would force them to do.
  As far as i can see, LGPL doesn't have this strict requirement.  You
 just need to make the LGPL part available to anyone who wants it.
 
  Will keep hammering away here.  LGPL sounds like it might be a better
 option, but i still reckon if Mr Yadegari is in favour of BSD, then that
 would be the best outcome.
  Personally i'd be happy to donate a couple of hundred dollars even to
 see a unified license for PD, but as this thread has shown, it sounds like
 i may get hippies camping on my lawn waving their GPL flags and trying to
 bum my goldfish.
 
  Just casually browsing through a bunch of PD patches this afternoon
 though, [expr] and especially [expr~] are undeniably useful and show up in
 so many patches.
 
 
 
  ___
  Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
  UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list





 

 You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear
 it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie





 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-30 Thread Georg Bosch



Am 24.10.2011 um 11:55 schrieb Andy Farnell:


On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:54:59 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:


What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a

carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?

I thought it would be ok to ask at least?  Would it really be that  
bad?


Sure. I can only tell you my own experience of that. Would you care  
to hear why

it's bad? based on personal experience I'll explain what I think.



I usually stay away from discussions like this, but I strongly  
disagree here. IMHO asking is always ok.


My experience, both asking and being asked, is this: if you release  
something, you have to deal with licensing, and though some aspects of  
it are interesting, its a nuisance to deal with generally. I want to  
do fun stuff with code, not wade through legal terms. What could be  
better than just asking the person who wrote the code 'hey, is it ok  
if i use it for this and that' and an actual human being replies? The  
chance to bypass all legalese and just ask the creator is certainly a  
nice feature of the internet.


Ironically, these things were - in contrast to bananas initial  
question - mostly related to apple (i.e. pd code for rjdj scenes). And  
while I am certainly not amused by apples current lock-in policies   
business practices, the experience of being able to talk directly with  
the author for me far outweighs having licenses fighting each other,  
even if its for the better of mankind or the economy.


If you have strong moral or political ideas behind your licensing  
choice, I don't see a problem when the are - literally - questioned:  
stand by them or question them yourself, it's your choice. And I had a  
hard time following Andy's Southpark and Drug dealer analogies - even  
though I read a whole book he wrote ;)



Cheers,

Georg


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-30 Thread Andy Farnell




Sorry about the South Park bit Georg,

I was trying to be too clever and do a snotty thing, making
a scathing wise-guy commentary on a company and community, 
while not naming any names.

As a believer in plain communication I should have the 
courage to just come out and say it:

Apple are a crap company, They treat their developers
like shit by making them pawns in a game, and it would serve
developers better to walk away from their platform and stop 
helping them hurt free software. 

There. 

Unfortunately some sensitive people take issue with that
kind of plain talk.

And you're absolutely right, as I happily concede, asking is
appropriate, even if it does cause discomfort. Now, since 
Hardoff asked both parties, and got an enthusiastic response 
from the author, and IRCAM down the chain, we are just waiting 
for Apple to enthusiastically respond or defend their position 
with a cogent argument.

So far it's looking like Kafka's Before the Law, except
with riddles and obfuscated tautologies in place of the
gatekeepers simple refusal.




On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:40:16 +0100
Georg Bosch k...@stillavailable.com wrote:

 
 Am 24.10.2011 um 11:55 schrieb Andy Farnell:
 
  On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:54:59 +0900
  i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:
 
  What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a
  carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?
 
  I thought it would be ok to ask at least?  Would it really be that  
  bad?
 
  Sure. I can only tell you my own experience of that. Would you care  
  to hear why
  it's bad? based on personal experience I'll explain what I think.
 
 
 I usually stay away from discussions like this, but I strongly  
 disagree here. IMHO asking is always ok.
 
 My experience, both asking and being asked, is this: if you release  
 something, you have to deal with licensing, and though some aspects of  
 it are interesting, its a nuisance to deal with generally. I want to  
 do fun stuff with code, not wade through legal terms. What could be  
 better than just asking the person who wrote the code 'hey, is it ok  
 if i use it for this and that' and an actual human being replies? The  
 chance to bypass all legalese and just ask the creator is certainly a  
 nice feature of the internet.
 
 Ironically, these things were - in contrast to bananas initial  
 question - mostly related to apple (i.e. pd code for rjdj scenes). And  
 while I am certainly not amused by apples current lock-in policies   
 business practices, the experience of being able to talk directly with  
 the author for me far outweighs having licenses fighting each other,  
 even if its for the better of mankind or the economy.
 
 If you have strong moral or political ideas behind your licensing  
 choice, I don't see a problem when the are - literally - questioned:  
 stand by them or question them yourself, it's your choice. And I had a  
 hard time following Andy's Southpark and Drug dealer analogies - even  
 though I read a whole book he wrote ;)
 
 
 Cheers,
 
 Georg
 
 
 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread Roman Haefeli


On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 17:04 -0200, Ricardo Fabbri wrote:
 1) if you want someone to change their licensing, at least be willing
 to offer them some cash. basically, you buy the new licensing. this
 part is not free! I would go as far as saying it's unpolite to ask to
 switch a license without offering money.

What makes you think that it's more polite to offer money than offering
cooking spaghetti with pesto sauce for all his/her friends or helping
code something in another project?
IMHO, one major advantage of being involved in open source software
development is the freedom to contribute what I want, when I want, how
much I want etc. and as long as there is no money involved it is easy to
keep that freedom untouched.
In a similar manner an author is free to change the licensing of their
software whenever they want to whatever they want. Probably, this
decision for a certain license was done carefully or rather in a
light-headed manner. Either way, I'm  not clear whether offering money
is the (morally) right incentive to re-think that decision. One could
even argue that it is corrupting the initial ideal of the original
decision.
When you say basically, you buy the new licensing this sounds to me
very much like business lingo about commercial software and also like
you were applying economic concepts of commercial software to open
source software. To me it's not obvious that in order to get a different
license you have to pay money for it.

Roman



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread i go bananas

oh FFS.

can all the politcal activists just leave this thread alone now?

aren't you all meant to be occupying wall street anyway?

as Max already pointed out, Shadrokh himself wanted expr to be BSD from the
start, so all the political/moral/religious discussions about GPL and blah
blah blah, just take it all to [OT] where it belongs.
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread Andy Farnell

On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:52:26 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 oh FFS.

This is for _your_ sake. 

Dismissing the implications of the coversation you started
seems a little ungrateful, if you don't mind me saying so.

-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread i go bananas

if people want to talk politics in a thread started by a person with
bananas in their name, then what do they expect?

get back to occupying wall street you hippies!
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread Andy Farnell




On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:00:55 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 if people want to talk politics in a thread started by a person with
 bananas in their name, then what do they expect?

LOL. Well there you go. Welcome to the fruit basket.


 
 get back to occupying wall street you hippies!

I think all the hippes took jobs in banks in '69
It's their pissed off kids making meery hell outside.

-- 
Andy Hatstand Napolean III  Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread i go bananas

well, i have taken the first step towards harrassing apple.

this is the next page i was sent to after i sent the mail:


Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to contact us.

If you do not receive a response from an Apple employee, we regret that we
are unable to process your request. Please note that due to the high volume
of requests we receive, this may be the only other reply you will receive
from us.

We appreciate your interest and consideration in contacting Apple.

Best Regards,

Apple Legal
Copyright Team
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread Pierre Massat

I know it takes a fair amount of faith, but you could try and contact Steve
Jobs directly.

Pierre

2011/10/27 i go bananas hard@gmail.com

 well, i have taken the first step towards harrassing apple.

 this is the next page i was sent to after i sent the mail:

 
 Thank You

 Thank you for taking the time to contact us.

 If you do not receive a response from an Apple employee, we regret that we
 are unable to process your request. Please note that due to the high volume
 of requests we receive, this may be the only other reply you will receive
 from us.

 We appreciate your interest and consideration in contacting Apple.

 Best Regards,

 Apple Legal
 Copyright Team




 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-27 Thread Hans-Christoph Steiner



Emailing is a good start. A better way to get their attention is to  
file a bug report.


.hc


On Oct 27, 2011, at 10:15 AM, i go bananas wrote:


well, i have taken the first step towards harrassing apple.

this is the next page i was sent to after i sent the mail:


Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to contact us.

If you do not receive a response from an Apple employee, we regret  
that we are unable to process your request. Please note that due to  
the high volume of requests we receive, this may be the only other  
reply you will receive from us.


We appreciate your interest and consideration in contacting Apple.

Best Regards,

Apple Legal
Copyright Team





___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list






We have nothing to fear from love and commitment. - New York Senator  
Diane Savino, trying to convince the NY Senate to pass a gay marriage  
bill


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-26 Thread Jonathan Wilkes

- Original Message -

 From: Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
 To: Simon Wise simonzw...@gmail.com
 Cc: pd-list@iem.at
 Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:20 AM
 Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

 On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 08:51:23AM +0800, Simon Wise wrote:
  On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

  The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
  understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the 
 GPL and
  LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and 
 LGPL
  software.

  this is of course the best solution ... 

 8 snip license advocacy and geopolitical theory 8

 I would like to register my disagreement.  In my opinion, the solution which
 best serves the broad community of users -- including those users for whom
 expr's licensing is problematic -- is for Pd Vanilla to have uniform BSD
 licensing.  It seems to me that an implementation of expr which is
 license-compatible with the rest of Vanilla is a perfectly reasonable and
 understandable feature request.

 The practical rationale is obvious: if GPL (or potentially LGPL) is not an
 option for you, then expr is missing from your toolkit, and it would be nice
 to have it.  I understand that there are several valuable contributors within
 the Pd community who believe that it is important to deny that feature request
 for moral reasons.  There are also opposing moral reasons to grant it, but as
 before, I intend to keep my developer list posts on licensing limited to
 dry mechanics if possible; if you absolutely cannot live without a sprinkle of
 BSD license advocacy to complement the on-list deluge of copyleft license
 advocacy, please ask off-list.

As it is, I don't think the expr family objects are suitable for inclusion as 
internal 
objects because of what I mentioned about clashing with standard implied Pd 
floats (as well as the automatic stripping of unnecessary decimal points and 
zeroes).  So even if one got the license changed, one would still have to 
figure 
out a way to make expr more Pd-ish without breaking backwards compatibility. 
(I'm not sure that's even possible.)

But here's a novel idea-- how about the guy who wants a 3-clause BSD-licensed 
expr for the expressed _sole_ purpose of using the object in proprietary 
software actually _pay_ money to a developer to code a similar BSD-licensed 
object?

-Jonathan

 Best,

 Marvin Humphrey

 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-26 Thread Andy Farnell

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com wrote:

 little documentation or support whatsoever-- not to mention hardware like 
 Apple's 
 which gets periodic firmware updates specifically to break compatibility with 
 anything other than Itunes.  

This is what I mean by anti-economics. Like when EU trade agreements
meant that farmers burned food surplus 1000 miles away from famine. 
Like the legendary E.T. landfill where Atari dumped millions of game
cartridges in an act of vanity.

The principle of destroying wealth to create profit is disgusting.
It is less damaging at the global level to just print money. It 
is one man digging a hole and another filling it in, to create 
employment. And it is predicated on the fallacy of infinite resources.

DRM, region lockouts, deliberate (and maintained) incompatibilities,
are all part of the defective by design rationale, a deliberate
anti-choice approach that must be carefully distinguished from
plurality and competition.

Fully working generic units are shipped from China. Then we break
them. Sometimes we employ as many people to limit the functionality
of devices as to design and create them. This ensures they end up 
in landfills sooner than necessary. If people understood its impact,
phone locking would be illegal on purely environmental grounds.

These paradoxes of instrumental reason that Nash and Marcuse 
visited in different ways, through game theory and critique aren't
inevitable or intrinsic problems. They require short-sighted
stupidity to come alive.

The necessary conditions for short term thinking are not just
crisis, but traits like vanity, duplicity and deception that go with
marketing dominated companies where image is valued over impact and
form over function. The distance between the Apple 1984 
television advert and current corporate stance is breathtaking. 


-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-26 Thread Max

Am 26.10.2011 um 05:28 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
 On Oct 25, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Simon Wise wrote:
 On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
 
 The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
 understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the GPL 
 and
 LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and LGPL
 software.
 
 this is of course the best solution ... but it seems that Apple is deeply 
 opposed to GPL and all it represents, they have always been happy to use 
 Open Source code, and contributed some too, but have stuck to BSD licensed 
 code where-ever they can, and only used GPL stuff when they had no other 
 choice.
 
 They seem to object to the idea that using open source code should require a 
 reciprocal release of their own improvements and would rather use the work 
 of others, but keep their own contributions secret and for their profit only.
 
 This is quite a common attitude, and I assume the reason a lot of companies 
 prefer BSD code. But I believe that the reason Linux is as strong as it is 
 is exactly because of its license ... any corporation (or any individual) 
 that wishes to use Linux legally and distribute their version must do their 
 part and publish their improvements.
 
 
 This isn't entirely true with Apple, but it is becoming more and more true.  
 Apple has done some real contributions to free software, WebKit is one good 
 example, though they forked off of KHTML in a bit of a punkish way.  Then 
 they merged the BSD parts of Mac OS X with FreeBSD so its the same code base. 
  They paid Daniel Steffen to port Tcl/Tk to Cocoa as well.  They also 
 contribute to gcc, which is GPL software, and its their main compiler for 
 both Mac OS X and iOS.
 
 Then came iOS, and they got crazy.

it's getting quite OT here but there is also CUPS
http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html

m.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-26 Thread Hans-Christoph Steiner



On Oct 26, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:


On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 08:51:23AM +0800, Simon Wise wrote:

On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from  
what I
understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with  
the GPL and
LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all  
GPL and LGPL

software.


this is of course the best solution ...


8 snip license advocacy and geopolitical theory 8

I would like to register my disagreement.  In my opinion, the  
solution which
best serves the broad community of users -- including those users  
for whom
expr's licensing is problematic -- is for Pd Vanilla to have uniform  
BSD

licensing.  It seems to me that an implementation of expr which is
license-compatible with the rest of Vanilla is a perfectly  
reasonable and

understandable feature request.

The practical rationale is obvious: if GPL (or potentially LGPL) is  
not an
option for you, then expr is missing from your toolkit, and it would  
be nice
to have it.  I understand that there are several valuable  
contributors within
the Pd community who believe that it is important to deny that  
feature request
for moral reasons.  There are also opposing moral reasons to grant  
it, but as
before, I intend to keep my developer list posts on licensing  
limited to
dry mechanics if possible; if you absolutely cannot live without a  
sprinkle of
BSD license advocacy to complement the on-list deluge of copyleft  
license

advocacy, please ask off-list.



We're talking about freedom here.  If you want to write a BSD-licensed  
expr clone, please do.  I don't think you'll find any objections.  The  
objections have been to people asking others to change the licenses  
they chose.


.hc




  http://at.or.at/hans/



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

1) if you want someone to change their licensing, at least be willing
to offer them some cash. basically, you buy the new licensing. this
part is not free! I would go as far as saying it's unpolite to ask to
switch a license without offering money.

2) If you write a clone, be original lest you be sued.

3) Colloquy IRC chat client is an example of a GPL software that has a
BSD core and mobile version. Not sure if that's because the authors
are the copyright holders so they can switch licensing as they please.
See:

http://colloquy.info/project/wiki/Source%20Code

Ricardo Fabbri
--
Linux registered user #175401
labmacambira.sf.net

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at wrote:

On Oct 26, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 08:51:23AM +0800, Simon Wise wrote:

On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the
GPL and
LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and
LGPL
software.

this is of course the best solution ...

8 snip license advocacy and geopolitical theory 8

I would like to register my disagreement. In my opinion, the solution
which
best serves the broad community of users -- including those users for whom
expr's licensing is problematic -- is for Pd Vanilla to have uniform BSD
licensing. It seems to me that an implementation of expr which is
license-compatible with the rest of Vanilla is a perfectly reasonable and
understandable feature request.

The practical rationale is obvious: if GPL (or potentially LGPL) is not an
option for you, then expr is missing from your toolkit, and it would be
nice
to have it. I understand that there are several valuable contributors
within
the Pd community who believe that it is important to deny that feature
request
for moral reasons. There are also opposing moral reasons to grant it, but
as
before, I intend to keep my developer list posts on licensing limited to
dry mechanics if possible; if you absolutely cannot live without a
sprinkle of
BSD license advocacy to complement the on-list deluge of copyleft license
advocacy, please ask off-list.

We're talking about freedom here. If you want to write a BSD-licensed expr
clone, please do. I don't think you'll find any objections. The objections
have been to people asking others to change the licenses they chose.

.hc

http://at.or.at/hans/

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-26 Thread Mathieu Bouchard


Le 2011-10-26 à 17:04:00, Ricardo Fabbri a écrit :

3) Colloquy IRC chat client is an example of a GPL software that has a 
BSD core and mobile version. Not sure if that's because the authors are 
the copyright holders so they can switch licensing as they please.


It looks fairly clear that this software has no relicensing, and instead 
has two different licenses for two different parts.


Isn't it ?

 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-24 à 20:27:00, Andy Farnell a écrit :


It's not a discouragement to Matt to contact the author,


Who is Matt ?

 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread i go bananas

i am.  i probably shouldn't mess round with my mail settings so much.
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread Max

Update: Shahrokh just wrote me that he has asked IRCAM if they would be okay 
with releasing the expr code under LGPL.

Quote:
“I got news from IRCAM that they are willing to release expr code on LGPL. Will 
that solve the current licensing problems? Max, could you communicate to the 
list and let me know what they think about this. I hope this helps.”

So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of GPL? What does 
that mean for things like the Apple App Store?

max

Am 24.10.2011 um 18:45 schrieb Max:

 Am 23.10.2011 um 19:27 schrieb i go bananas:
 or has anyone ever tried contacting the original authors and asking them to 
 change the license so it can fit in with pd's standard BSD ??
 
 I've had the pleasure to meet Shahrokh Yadegari a few weeks back here in 
 Weimar and asked him about just that. He said he always wanted to change the 
 license to BSD.
 IIRC it is based on some older code which has a  licence attached he can't 
 change, so he would like to rewrite those parts but simply didn't find the 
 time to do that yet.
 On the website ( http://crca.ucsd.edu/~yadegari/expr.html ) is written:
 “Based on original sources from IRCAM's jMax 
 Released under GNU's General Public License.”
 
 According to Shahrokh that would take him under a week to do but it was a 
 matter of time/priority that it had not happened as of today.
 So maybe asking him nicely could to the trick. Or send a voucher for week in 
 a californian retreat...
 
 Max___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :

So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of GPL? 
What does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?


In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even though it 
does look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's not impossible 
they might have rewritten them just to avoid the license...).


There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the web, so, 
to sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the FSF about it.


Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give more 
attention to your question.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative



On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:


Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :

So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of  
GPL? What does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?


In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even though  
it does look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's not  
impossible they might have rewritten them just to avoid the  
license...).


There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the web,  
so, to sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the FSF  
about it.


Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give more  
attention to your question.



The problems are with software that ships from the Apple App Store,  
due to the way that is managed and the Terms of Service. It is the  
management and terms of service of the App Store that conflict with  
the GPL/LGPL.  Apple ships lots of GPL and LGPL software as part of  
Mac OS X and iOS, but that does not touch the Apple App Store, so they  
can be in complete compliance.


So Max, if you are interested in the Apple App Store, I think it is  
incompatible with all FSF licenses, and perhaps all copyleft  
licenses.  The short term answer is to ship your iOS apps outside of  
the App Store, and the real fix is to get Apple to make their App  
Store compatible with copyleft licenses.


.hc




Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally  
for machines to execute.

 - from Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread Max

Am 25.10.2011 um 19:10 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
 On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :
 
 So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of GPL? What 
 does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?
 
 In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even though it does 
 look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's not impossible they might 
 have rewritten them just to avoid the license...).
 
 There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the web, so, to 
 sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the FSF about it.
 
 Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give more 
 attention to your question.
 
 
 The problems are with software that ships from the Apple App Store, due to 
 the way that is managed and the Terms of Service. It is the management and 
 terms of service of the App Store that conflict with the GPL/LGPL.  Apple 
 ships lots of GPL and LGPL software as part of Mac OS X and iOS, but that 
 does not touch the Apple App Store, so they can be in complete compliance.
 
 So Max, if you are interested in the Apple App Store, I think it is 
 incompatible with all FSF licenses, and perhaps all copyleft licenses.  The 
 short term answer is to ship your iOS apps outside of the App Store, and the 
 real fix is to get Apple to make their App Store compatible with copyleft 
 licenses.


The question was asked by the author of expr - maybe I must re-phrase: Now that 
IRCAM is okay with changing their license of parts of expr from GPL to LGPL 
would that solve the issue of expr beeing used in the BSD vanilla in 
applications like for instance RJDJ in the Apple App store? (Or respectively 
any other use scenario where the choice of license imposes restrictions) If the 
answer is yes, then Shahrokh can go ahead and change the licence, fixed. If the 
answer is no, then a rewrite of expr to be fully BSD is probably the only 
solution to solve this. 

m.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative



On Oct 25, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Max wrote:


Am 25.10.2011 um 19:10 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:

On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :

So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of  
GPL? What does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?


In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even  
though it does look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's  
not impossible they might have rewritten them just to avoid the  
license...).


There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the  
web, so, to sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the  
FSF about it.


Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give  
more attention to your question.



The problems are with software that ships from the Apple App Store,  
due to the way that is managed and the Terms of Service. It is the  
management and terms of service of the App Store that conflict with  
the GPL/LGPL.  Apple ships lots of GPL and LGPL software as part of  
Mac OS X and iOS, but that does not touch the Apple App Store, so  
they can be in complete compliance.


So Max, if you are interested in the Apple App Store, I think it is  
incompatible with all FSF licenses, and perhaps all copyleft  
licenses.  The short term answer is to ship your iOS apps outside  
of the App Store, and the real fix is to get Apple to make their  
App Store compatible with copyleft licenses.



The question was asked by the author of expr - maybe I must re- 
phrase: Now that IRCAM is okay with changing their license of parts  
of expr from GPL to LGPL would that solve the issue of expr beeing  
used in the BSD vanilla in applications like for instance RJDJ in  
the Apple App store? (Or respectively any other use scenario where  
the choice of license imposes restrictions) If the answer is yes,  
then Shahrokh can go ahead and change the licence, fixed. If the  
answer is no, then a rewrite of expr to be fully BSD is probably the  
only solution to solve this.



The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I  
understand.  Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the  
GPL and LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for  
all GPL and LGPL software.


.hc




  ¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

- Original Message -
 From: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at
 To: Max abonneme...@revolwear.com
 Cc: PD list pd-list@iem.at; Shahrokh Yadegari s...@ucsd.edu
 Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 1:29 PM
 Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

 On Oct 25, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Max wrote:

  Am 25.10.2011 um 19:10 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
  On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
  Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :

  So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of 
 GPL? What does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?

  In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even 
 though it does look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's not 
 impossible they might have rewritten them just to avoid the license...).

  There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the 
 web, so, to sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the FSF about it.

  Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give 
 more attention to your question.

  The problems are with software that ships from the Apple App Store, due 
 to the way that is managed and the Terms of Service. It is the management and 
 terms of service of the App Store that conflict with the GPL/LGPL.  Apple 
 ships 
 lots of GPL and LGPL software as part of Mac OS X and iOS, but that does not 
 touch the Apple App Store, so they can be in complete compliance.

  So Max, if you are interested in the Apple App Store, I think it is 
 incompatible with all FSF licenses, and perhaps all copyleft licenses.  The 
 short term answer is to ship your iOS apps outside of the App Store, and the 
 real fix is to get Apple to make their App Store compatible with copyleft 
 licenses.

  The question was asked by the author of expr - maybe I must re-phrase: Now 
 that IRCAM is okay with changing their license of parts of expr from GPL to 
 LGPL 
 would that solve the issue of expr beeing used in the BSD vanilla in 
 applications like for instance RJDJ in the Apple App store? (Or respectively 
 any 
 other use scenario where the choice of license imposes restrictions) If the 
 answer is yes, then Shahrokh can go ahead and change the licence, fixed. If 
 the 
 answer is no, then a rewrite of expr to be fully BSD is probably the only 
 solution to solve this.

If someone rewrites it with a 3-clause BSD license, I hope they also address 
some of 
expr family's shortcomings.  The ones I know are 1) string concatenation with 
dollarsign 
variables doesn't work, and 2) all the expr objects have a Max-centric view of 
numbers 
that clashes with Pd's everything-is-a-float philosophy.  (If you don't 
understand 
what I mean, matju has written about it on the list and I've also documented it 
in the 
revised PDDP help patches for expr.)

 The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I 
 understand.  Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the GPL 
 and 
 LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and LGPL 
 software.

http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement

 .hc

                   ¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!

 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative



Hey Martin,

I haven't heard that before.  Do you have any references on the App  
Store being compatible with the LGPL?  I found this write-up on the  
topic, it makes sense to me, and outlines basically how the App Store  
is incompatible with the FSF copyleft idea, which is definitely  
included in this LGPL:


http://michelf.com/weblog/2011/gpl-ios-app-store/

One thing to remember in all this: it is totally legal and clear to  
make an GPL/LGPL app for iOS and distribute it outside of the App  
Store.  It is the App Store that is the issue.


.hc

On Oct 25, 2011, at 1:39 PM, Martin Roth wrote:

As far as I know, if expr would be LGPL, then everything is ok, even  
in the App Store. The expr library itself can be used in non-GPL  
code (like Pd). The library source is freely widely available on the  
internet. And otherwise if anyone makes any changes to the expr  
object then those changes should be made public. Done and done.


On 25 October 2011 18:26, Max abonneme...@revolwear.com wrote:
Am 25.10.2011 um 19:10 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
 On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 Le 2011-10-25 à 12:19:00, Max a écrit :

 So what is the situation now that expr could be LGPL instead of  
GPL? What does that mean for things like the Apple App Store?


 In the end I'm not sure anymore that LGPL would be fine, even  
though it does look like Apple ships with LGPL libs. (Though it's  
not impossible they might have rewritten them just to avoid the  
license...).


 There's too much contradiction between comments about it on the  
web, so, to sort out the subtleties, it would be best to ask the FSF  
about it.


 Well, you could ask Apple too. But I bet that the FSF will give  
more attention to your question.



 The problems are with software that ships from the Apple App  
Store, due to the way that is managed and the Terms of Service. It  
is the management and terms of service of the App Store that  
conflict with the GPL/LGPL.  Apple ships lots of GPL and LGPL  
software as part of Mac OS X and iOS, but that does not touch the  
Apple App Store, so they can be in complete compliance.


 So Max, if you are interested in the Apple App Store, I think it  
is incompatible with all FSF licenses, and perhaps all copyleft  
licenses.  The short term answer is to ship your iOS apps outside of  
the App Store, and the real fix is to get Apple to make their App  
Store compatible with copyleft licenses.



The question was asked by the author of expr - maybe I must re- 
phrase: Now that IRCAM is okay with changing their license of parts  
of expr from GPL to LGPL would that solve the issue of expr beeing  
used in the BSD vanilla in applications like for instance RJDJ in  
the Apple App store? (Or respectively any other use scenario where  
the choice of license imposes restrictions) If the answer is yes,  
then Shahrokh can go ahead and change the licence, fixed. If the  
answer is no, then a rewrite of expr to be fully BSD is probably the  
only solution to solve this.


m.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iEYEARECAAYFAk6m8S8ACgkQ3EB7kzgMM6JUFACffi7KPTf0PFuOXfDR829SNMHz
BK4AnRXBVU0Xj8s0IqrJjbdDBCy3O90M
=ngpy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-




--
Martin Roth, CTO

Tel : +44 793 241 66 20
Twitter : @supersg559

Reality Jockey, Ltd.
55B Holywell Lane
EC2A 3PQ
London, UK









Free software means you control what your computer does. Non-free  
software means someone else controls that, and to some extent controls  
you. - Richard M. Stallman



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-25 à 10:45:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

2) all the expr objects have a Max-centric view of numbers that clashes 
with Pd's everything-is-a-float philosophy.  (If you don't understand 
what I mean, matju has written about it on the list and I've also 
documented it in the revised PDDP help patches for expr.)


That's also a current difference between [expr] and [#expr], though it 
will probably not stay completely like that, because GF makes a big point 
of having several different number types in grids. So, whenever I write 
the other half of [#expr] (add grid processing), it will probably support 
the 6 number types of grids, instead of the 2 of jMax/Max or the 1 of Pd.

Until then, [#expr] only does floats.

I think that [#expr] will not have ints outside of grids, but I have not 
really thought about it yet.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

- Original Message -
 From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
 To: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com
 Cc: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at; Max abonneme...@revolwear.com; 
 PD list pd-list@iem.at; Shahrokh Yadegari s...@ucsd.edu
 Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 2:31 PM
 Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

 Le 2011-10-25 à 10:45:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

  2) all the expr objects have a Max-centric view of numbers that clashes 
 with Pd's everything-is-a-float philosophy.  (If you don't 
 understand what I mean, matju has written about it on the list and I've also 
 documented it in the revised PDDP help patches for expr.)

 That's also a current difference between [expr] and [#expr], though it will 
 probably not stay completely like that, because GF makes a big point of 
 having 
 several different number types in grids. So, whenever I write the other half 
 of 
 [#expr] (add grid processing), it will probably support the 6 number types of 
 grids, instead of the 2 of jMax/Max or the 1 of Pd.
 Until then, [#expr] only does floats.

 I think that [#expr] will not have ints outside of grids, but I have not 
 really 
 thought about it yet.

It's worth noting that the current [expr] is both Max-centric-- because 
numbers 
written as integers imply integer math-- and incompatible with Max-- because in 
object 
boxes Pd strips the decimal from 1. which is a common idiom in Max to force 
float math.

Any attempt at a new/improved expr should realize this and just forget being 
max 
compatible and try to make it as Pd-ish as possible.

-Jonathan

 __
 | Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:

- Original Message -

From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
To: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com
Cc: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at; Max abonneme...@revolwear.com 
; PD list pd-list@iem.at; Shahrokh Yadegari s...@ucsd.edu

Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

Le 2011-10-25 à 10:45:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

2) all the expr objects have a Max-centric view of numbers that  
clashes

with Pd's everything-is-a-float philosophy.  (If you don't
understand what I mean, matju has written about it on the list and  
I've also

documented it in the revised PDDP help patches for expr.)

That's also a current difference between [expr] and [#expr], though  
it will
probably not stay completely like that, because GF makes a big  
point of having
several different number types in grids. So, whenever I write the  
other half of
[#expr] (add grid processing), it will probably support the 6  
number types of

grids, instead of the 2 of jMax/Max or the 1 of Pd.
Until then, [#expr] only does floats.

I think that [#expr] will not have ints outside of grids, but I  
have not really

thought about it yet.

It's worth noting that the current [expr] is both Max-centric--  
because numbers
written as integers imply integer math-- and incompatible with Max--  
because in object
boxes Pd strips the decimal from 1. which is a common idiom in Max  
to force float math.

Any attempt at a new/improved expr should realize this and just  
forget being max

compatible and try to make it as Pd-ish as possible.

That sounds like a bug that should be reported to the tracker, at the  
very least.

.hc

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during  
that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big  
Business, for Wall Street and the bankers.  - General Smedley Butler

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-25 à 12:38:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

It's worth noting that the current [expr] is both Max-centric-- 
because numbers written as integers imply integer math-- and 
incompatible with Max-- because in object boxes Pd strips the decimal 
from 1. which is a common idiom in Max to force float math.


Pd also turns «1.0» (and such) into «1».

However, Pd never strips those things if they get parsed as symbols.

thus [expr 1.0/2] gives 0.5 whereas [expr 1.0 /2] will become [expr 1 /2] 
which will give 0.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

- Original Message -
 From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
 To: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com
 Cc: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at; Max abonneme...@revolwear.com; 
 PD list pd-list@iem.at; Shahrokh Yadegari s...@ucsd.edu
 Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 3:47 PM
 Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

 Le 2011-10-25 à 12:38:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

  It's worth noting that the current [expr] is both 
 Max-centric-- because numbers written as integers imply integer 
 math-- and incompatible with Max-- because in object boxes Pd strips the 
 decimal 
 from 1. which is a common idiom in Max to force float math.

 Pd also turns «1.0» (and such) into «1».

 However, Pd never strips those things if they get parsed as symbols.

 thus [expr 1.0/2] gives 0.5 whereas [expr 1.0 /2] will become [expr 1 /2] 
 which 
 will give 0.

Right, but that punishes the Pd users by making them use Max notation to force 
floating point math, and it confuses the Max users coming to (or porting 
patches 
to) Pd, who learn Pd's float-centrism then are forced to relearn some 
bizarro version of Max number types where spaces matter.

But I wouldn't call that a bug because I can't remember if [expr] claims to be 
Max-compatible or not.

-Jonathan

 __
 | Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-25 à 14:02:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :

Right, but that punishes the Pd users by making them use Max notation to 
force floating point math, and it confuses the Max users coming to (or 
porting patches to) Pd, who learn Pd's float-centrism then are forced to 
relearn some bizarro version of Max number types where spaces matter.


I know, but I just wanted to state it like it is, not like we'd like it to 
be.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread Simon Wise


On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:


The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the GPL and
LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and LGPL
software.


this is of course the best solution ... but it seems that Apple is deeply 
opposed to GPL and all it represents, they have always been happy to use Open 
Source code, and contributed some too, but have stuck to BSD licensed code 
where-ever they can, and only used GPL stuff when they had no other choice.


They seem to object to the idea that using open source code should require a 
reciprocal release of their own improvements and would rather use the work of 
others, but keep their own contributions secret and for their profit only.


This is quite a common attitude, and I assume the reason a lot of companies 
prefer BSD code. But I believe that the reason Linux is as strong as it is is 
exactly because of its license ... any corporation (or any individual) that 
wishes to use Linux legally and distribute their version must do their part and 
publish their improvements.


Simon

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

- Original Message -
 From: Simon Wise simonzw...@gmail.com
 To: pd-list@iem.at
 Cc: 
 Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:51 PM
 Subject: Re: [PD] expr alternative

 On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

  The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
  understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the GPL 
 and
  LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and 
 LGPL
  software.

 this is of course the best solution ... but it seems that Apple is deeply 
 opposed to GPL and all it represents, they have always been happy to use Open 
 Source code, and contributed some too, but have stuck to BSD licensed code 
 where-ever they can, and only used GPL stuff when they had no other choice.

 They seem to object to the idea that using open source code should require a 
 reciprocal release of their own improvements and would rather use the work of 
 others, but keep their own contributions secret and for their profit only.

It's worse than that-- they want to lock their customers into using their 
hardware 
only in the ways they intend.  Ever tried syncing an Ipad with a free software 
operating system?

Free software devs spend an inordinate amount of time getting free software 
operating systems to work with hardware for which the manufacture gives very 
little documentation or support whatsoever-- not to mention hardware like 
Apple's 
which gets periodic firmware updates specifically to break compatibility with 
anything other than Itunes.  So it's not even really about refusing to give 
back to the 
community-- it's about making the device less useful by arbitrarily limiting 
what the 
user can do with it.  I can't think of a better polar opposite for pure data.

-Jonathan

 This is quite a common attitude, and I assume the reason a lot of companies 
 prefer BSD code.
 But I believe that the reason Linux is as strong as it is is 
 exactly because of its license ... any corporation (or any individual) that 
 wishes to use Linux legally and distribute their version must do their part 
 and 
 publish their improvements.

 Simon

 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread Simon Wise


On 26/10/11 09:53, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:


It's worse than that-- they want to lock their customers into using their 
hardware
only in the ways they intend.  Ever tried syncing an Ipad with a free software
operating system?


indeed it is, but I was trying to focus on the open source issue as relates to 
code.

Their corporate strategy regarding creating and maintaining a monopoly on as 
many technologies as they can, and taking a percentage of every transaction 
within those monopoly platforms is very sensible and reasonable way to maximise 
profits if you have the resources and embrace free market principles.


Most economists and all free market advocates assume this is as a good thing, 
and the best way to run a society. Obviously I personally disagree very strongly 
with this assertion, and so do many others. But the current western model of 
society says this behaviour is not only legal, but is admirable - a best 
practice example of successful marketing and a very profitable business model.


It is all bullshit, but many many voters disagree with me on this.

Simon




Free software devs spend an inordinate amount of time getting free software
operating systems to work with hardware for which the manufacture gives very
little documentation or support whatsoever-- not to mention hardware like 
Apple's
which gets periodic firmware updates specifically to break compatibility with
anything other than Itunes.  So it's not even really about refusing to give 
back to the
community-- it's about making the device less useful by arbitrarily limiting 
what the
user can do with it.  I can't think of a better polar opposite for pure data.

-Jonathan



This is quite a common attitude, and I assume the reason a lot of companies
prefer BSD code.
But I believe that the reason Linux is as strong as it is is
exactly because of its license ... any corporation (or any individual) that
wishes to use Linux legally and distribute their version must do their part and
publish their improvements.

Simon

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list






___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative



On Oct 25, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Simon Wise wrote:


On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from  
what I
understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with  
the GPL and
LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL  
and LGPL

software.


this is of course the best solution ... but it seems that Apple is  
deeply opposed to GPL and all it represents, they have always been  
happy to use Open Source code, and contributed some too, but have  
stuck to BSD licensed code where-ever they can, and only used GPL  
stuff when they had no other choice.


They seem to object to the idea that using open source code should  
require a reciprocal release of their own improvements and would  
rather use the work of others, but keep their own contributions  
secret and for their profit only.


This is quite a common attitude, and I assume the reason a lot of  
companies prefer BSD code. But I believe that the reason Linux is as  
strong as it is is exactly because of its license ... any  
corporation (or any individual) that wishes to use Linux legally and  
distribute their version must do their part and publish their  
improvements.



This isn't entirely true with Apple, but it is becoming more and more  
true.  Apple has done some real contributions to free software, WebKit  
is one good example, though they forked off of KHTML in a bit of a  
punkish way.  Then they merged the BSD parts of Mac OS X with FreeBSD  
so its the same code base.  They paid Daniel Steffen to port Tcl/Tk to  
Cocoa as well.  They also contribute to gcc, which is GPL software,  
and its their main compiler for both Mac OS X and iOS.


Then came iOS, and they got crazy.

.hc




Terrorism is not an enemy.  It cannot be defeated.  It's a tactic.   
It's about as sensible to say we declare war on night attacks and  
expect we're going to win that war.  We're not going to win the war on  
terrorism.- retired U.S. Army general, William Odom




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-26 à 10:32:00, Simon Wise a écrit :

Their corporate strategy regarding creating and maintaining a monopoly 
on as many technologies as they can, and taking a percentage of every 
transaction within those monopoly platforms is very sensible and 
reasonable way to maximise profits if you have the resources and embrace 
free market principles.


A monopoly is not a free market.

Laissez-faire doesn't make a market free either.

What do you mean by « free market » ???

 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative


Le 2011-10-25 à 23:28:00, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :

They also contribute to gcc, which is GPL software, and its their main 
compiler for both Mac OS X and iOS. Then came iOS, and they got crazy.


In XCode 4.2, they removed the option named just «GCC», leaving the choice 
between «GCC LLVM» and «Apple LLVM», and if you pick the former, they pop 
a warning that suggests that you upgrade your project-file to use the 
latter. That's what I saw yesterday, from memory.


So, what exactly is «Apple LLVM» ?

 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-25 Thread Marvin Humphrey

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 08:51:23AM +0800, Simon Wise wrote:
 On 26/10/11 01:29, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

 The Apple App Store is incompatible with the GPL and LGPL, from what I
 understand. Getting Apple to make their App Store compatible with the GPL and
 LGPL is another much better solution since it will work for all GPL and LGPL
 software.

 this is of course the best solution ... 

8 snip license advocacy and geopolitical theory 8

I would like to register my disagreement.  In my opinion, the solution which
best serves the broad community of users -- including those users for whom
expr's licensing is problematic -- is for Pd Vanilla to have uniform BSD
licensing.  It seems to me that an implementation of expr which is
license-compatible with the rest of Vanilla is a perfectly reasonable and
understandable feature request.

The practical rationale is obvious: if GPL (or potentially LGPL) is not an
option for you, then expr is missing from your toolkit, and it would be nice
to have it.  I understand that there are several valuable contributors within
the Pd community who believe that it is important to deny that feature request
for moral reasons.  There are also opposing moral reasons to grant it, but as
before, I intend to keep my developer list posts on licensing limited to
dry mechanics if possible; if you absolutely cannot live without a sprinkle of
BSD license advocacy to complement the on-list deluge of copyleft license
advocacy, please ask off-list.

Best,

Marvin Humphrey


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Lorenzo Sutton


On 23/10/2011 19:54, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:


On Oct 23, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:


Le 2011-10-24 à 02:27:00, i go bananas a écrit :


how hard would it be to rewrite the expr code so that it doesn't need
to be GPL licensed?
[...]


I think the Apple App Store conflicts with all GNU/FSF licenses. Any
effort to switch code to BSD in order to work around Apple's lameness
should also be matched with efforts to get Apple to stop being so lame.


+1

Lorenzo.



.hc





Free software means you control what your computer does. Non-free
software means someone else controls that, and to some extent controls
you. - Richard M. Stallman



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:16:18 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 in that case, it might be as simple as a nice email to Shadrokh Yadegari to
 get his expr for pd license changed to LGPL too??

What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a 
carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?

-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a
carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?

I thought it would be ok to ask at least?  Would it really be that bad?



On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.ukwrote:

 On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:16:18 +0900
 i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

  in that case, it might be as simple as a nice email to Shadrokh Yadegari
 to
  get his expr for pd license changed to LGPL too??



 --
 Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

The GPL has absolutely no restrictions on commerce.  You are free to sell
any GPL software however you see fit. But you must give the source code to
everyone you give the software to.

sorry hans, i should have been clearer on that.  i meant 'closed source
commercial application'.



out of interest, what's the deal with pd being used as the audio engine for
computer games, like Spore, or whatever?  They don't make the source code
available, do they?  Wouldn't those applications also have to avoid [expr] ?
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

LGPL seems ok on iphone, legally at least.

http://multinc.com/2009/08/24/compatibility-between-the-iphone-app-store-and-the-lgpl/



On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:59 PM, i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 The GPL has absolutely no restrictions on commerce.  You are free to sell
 any GPL software however you see fit. But you must give the source code to
 everyone you give the software to.

 sorry hans, i should have been clearer on that.  i meant 'closed source
 commercial application'.



 out of interest, what's the deal with pd being used as the audio engine for
 computer games, like Spore, or whatever?  They don't make the source code
 available, do they?  Wouldn't those applications also have to avoid [expr] ?





___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative - licences

2011-10-24 Thread Charles Goyard

i go bananas wrote:
 out of interest, what's the deal with pd being used as the audio engine for
 computer games, like Spore, or whatever?  They don't make the source code
 available, do they?  Wouldn't those applications also have to avoid [expr] ?

To some extend, that's a point for GPLv3 : clarify the I just bundle
the the software as is situation and stuff like that.

You can always have libpd embedded in a dumb socket listener software,
with opened source code, and have your closed-source application connect
to it via TCP.  By doing so you respect the licence from a law
standpoint, but you don't really respect the spirit. It's up to you to
decide wheter it's a problem or not.


-- 
Charlot

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:54:59 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a
 carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?
 
 I thought it would be ok to ask at least?  Would it really be that bad?

Sure. I can only tell you my own experience of that. Would you care to hear why
it's bad? based on personal experience I'll explain what I think. 
If it can be made to come across okay and not seem overly pious or judgemental.
But when you say nice email, that's actually loaded with a whole bunch
of invisible values and implications, some of which are really sticky.

best,
Andy


-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

hi andy - of course i'd be very willing to know your point of view here,
particularly from your firsthand experience.

i didn't even know or care a thing at all about licenses until about 2 years
ago, and that was just from being employed to do the sound for an iphone
app.
with my own stuff i have come from a bit of an anarchist, feral techno
background, where actually breaking copyright and ignoring laws was part and
parcel of the scene.

all this shirt and tie business is quite foreign, but i just thought that if
there was some way i could help make vanilla a little bit more
'vanilla-ish', it would be worth a try.  at least worth a thread on this
mailing list to see the various ins and outs of why there is currently one
small section of the standard pd distribution that cannot be used in certain
situations.

no disrespect to anyone is intended, but if some is somehow implied, even by
sending an email, then yeah for sure, it is of course important information.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.ukwrote:

 On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:54:59 +0900
 i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

  What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a
  carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?
 
  I thought it would be ok to ask at least?  Would it really be that bad?

 Sure. I can only tell you my own experience of that. Would you care to hear
 why
 it's bad? based on personal experience I'll explain what I think.
 If it can be made to come across okay and not seem overly pious or
 judgemental.
 But when you say nice email, that's actually loaded with a whole bunch
 of invisible values and implications, some of which are really sticky.

 best,
 Andy


 --
 Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Mathieu Bouchard


Le 2011-10-24 à 11:16:00, i go bananas a écrit :


jMax is distributed under GNU’s Lesser General Public License
http://jmax.sourceforge.net/
is that the LGPL that mattieu is talking about?


My name is Mathieu.

I no longer think that the LGPL is ok with the AppStore.

in that case, it might be as simple as a nice email to Shadrokh Yadegari 
to get his expr for pd license changed to LGPL too??


If it's not going to be a change to LGPL, I doubt you will have success, 
but I don't know the person.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Mathieu Bouchard


Le 2011-10-24 à 16:59:00, i go bananas a écrit :

out of interest, what's the deal with pd being used as the audio engine 
for computer games, like Spore, or whatever?  They don't make the source 
code available, do they?  Wouldn't those applications also have to avoid 
[expr] ?


yes.

 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Mathieu Bouchard


Le 2011-10-24 à 17:16:00, i go bananas a écrit :


LGPL seems ok on iphone, legally at least.
http://multinc.com/2009/08/24/compatibility-between-the-iphone-app-store-and-the-lgpl/


Too much info on the net contradicting each other. I think that we might 
need legal advice or something that looks more like it than an anonymous 
post on a blog can.


The applicability of clauses about relinking .o files seems quite tricky 
in the iPhone case.


 __
| Mathieu BOUCHARD - téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 - Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:33:25 +0900
i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:

 hi andy - of course i'd be very willing to know your point of view here,
 particularly from your firsthand experience.

I got an email like that, it kept me awake for some nights. I
experienced annoyance, anger, conflict, frustration. Finally made a
utilitarian choice, a greater good served by me giving up on a couple
of strong principles, on that occasion. (Maybe the person involved is
reading, please know that it's still okay, I did not change my mind,
thanks for making me think hard about a whole lot of important
things.)

The thing about a nice email, no matter how politely and tactfully
you pen it, is that such a request can feel quite uncomfortable.
First it makes the assumption that the programmers choice of licence
was somehow shallow, maybe even arbitrary. Let's give all programmers
the benefit of the doubt and assume their intelligence extends to
proper reflection. The alternative is that they inherited a licence
which they have no power or choice to amend.

Secondly, when someone from your own community appeals to you to help
them with a cool project, maybe even to help them make a buck or
two, I expect you are like me and rarely hesitate if its no great
cost or time commitment. And if your needs and values clearly
conflict, then its easy to say no and properly communicate why. But
now familiar tensions between business and morality have come to the
fore in the last few years, and make demands of bad faith on you.
You're basically saying, I want to do this, but I am being bullied by
corporation X to do it this way, and since you are the weaker of two
conflicting moral opponents I choose to question your values and ask
you if you will move in order to suit me (and by proxy the
corporation).

To put it in plain talk, its like getting a message from an old
friend who got himself mixed up with with some bad drug dealers and
needs you to bail him out or something nasty is going to happen. It's
a dilemma where helping or not helping feels equally wrong. Where was
that friend last week, before he needed the money so bad? Giving them
money will just get them more enmeshed with a bad scene.


I don't mean that to reflect on you personally, it's just something
that needs to be put out there in the context change the licence
being an option. It should be a last resort after many other options
have been considered. Perfectly good choices consistent with proper
moral and free market principles are; if you are a businessmen or
lawyer for whom it might be an option why not start your own app
store. Or if you're a coder able to pull off writing a non GPL
version of the object from scratch, do that. For the rest of the
artists, choosing another platform for your application would be the
logical, rational choice. So would not using [expr], which is easily
replaced by discrete objects and a little thought.



-- 
Andy Farnell padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Marvin Humphrey

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 08:36:39AM +0100, Andy Farnell wrote:
 On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:16:18 +0900
 i go bananas hard@gmail.com wrote:
 
  in that case, it might be as simple as a nice email to Shadrokh Yadegari to
  get his expr for pd license changed to LGPL too??
 
 What makes you think its okay to ask someone to reconsider a 
 carefully made moral decision simply for your convenience?

I don't know the specifics of the expr case, and it may well be that the GPL
is something that Shadrokh Yadegari feels strongly about.  Still, as a data
point, when the codebase that is now Apache Lucy was granted to the ASF and we
had to get 20 copyright holders to sign off on on a license change from
GPL/Artistic to Apache 2.0, not a single one of them objected.  Not everyone
cares.

From a practical standpoint, if there have been any patches to expr since it
was added to Pd, it would be necessary to secure the consent of those authors
as well, any one of whom may refuse, or might not be available.  Relicensing
is hard.

But especially if writing a from-scratch alternative to expr is being
contemplated, I think it's commendable and wise for mr. bananas to at least
explore the possibility of achieving his objective via polite requests before
taking any other actions.

I don't think he should feel bad about that at all.  Indeed, that is the
community-friendly approach, attempting to keep development united.  I choose
to have faith that if expr's author receives a polite request regarding
relicensing, the response will also be polite, even if it is a rebuff.  If my
faith is misplaced and the response is instead an indignant flame, in my
opinion, that does not reflect poorly on mr. bananas.

There are those of us who are on the BSD side of the fence who also have
strong moral reasons for our choices.  You tend not to hear from us as often
because we feel you should have the freedom to GPL works which bundle ours,
just as you should have the right to release bundled software under
proprietary licenses.  Despite these strong beliefs, if I were to receive a
sincere request to relicense software I had written under a copyleft license,
I would not be offended and I would contemplate it in good faith.

Marvin Humphrey


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Bill Gribble

On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 15:26 +0100, Andy Farnell wrote:
 The thing about a nice email, no matter how politely and tactfully
 you pen it, is that such a request can feel quite uncomfortable.
 First it makes the assumption that the programmers choice of licence
 was somehow shallow, maybe even arbitrary. Let's give all programmers
 the benefit of the doubt and assume their intelligence extends to
 proper reflection.

The thing is, a lot of license choices ARE shallow and/or arbitrary.
Some people don't really care that much about license details and just
stick something free on there, without really considering if it does
exactly what they want.  I'm sorry that you had trouble handling a
license-exception request, but I have a hard time seeing how a simple
inquiry could be reasonably considered to be imposition on the
developer.  

Someone who is looking at the alternative of (1) reimplementing
something because of their license needs vs (2) being able to use (and
possibly contribute back to) an existing piece of code is really being
dumb if they DON'T ask.  If you are choosing to use a license that
retains some control over the use of your program, you have to expect to
be called on to say No every so often... 

Thanks,
Bill Gribble 


  The alternative is that they inherited a licence
 which they have no power or choice to amend.
 
 Secondly, when someone from your own community appeals to you to help
 them with a cool project, maybe even to help them make a buck or
 two, I expect you are like me and rarely hesitate if its no great
 cost or time commitment. And if your needs and values clearly
 conflict, then its easy to say no and properly communicate why. But
 now familiar tensions between business and morality have come to the
 fore in the last few years, and make demands of bad faith on you.
 You're basically saying, I want to do this, but I am being bullied by
 corporation X to do it this way, and since you are the weaker of two
 conflicting moral opponents I choose to question your values and ask
 you if you will move in order to suit me (and by proxy the
 corporation).
 
 To put it in plain talk, its like getting a message from an old
 friend who got himself mixed up with with some bad drug dealers and
 needs you to bail him out or something nasty is going to happen. It's
 a dilemma where helping or not helping feels equally wrong. Where was
 that friend last week, before he needed the money so bad? Giving them
 money will just get them more enmeshed with a bad scene.
 
 
 I don't mean that to reflect on you personally, it's just something
 that needs to be put out there in the context change the licence
 being an option. It should be a last resort after many other options
 have been considered. Perfectly good choices consistent with proper
 moral and free market principles are; if you are a businessmen or
 lawyer for whom it might be an option why not start your own app
 store. Or if you're a coder able to pull off writing a non GPL
 version of the object from scratch, do that. For the rest of the
 artists, choosing another platform for your application would be the
 logical, rational choice. So would not using [expr], which is easily
 replaced by discrete objects and a little thought.
 
 
 



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative

2011-10-24 Thread Max

Am 23.10.2011 um 19:27 schrieb i go bananas:
 or has anyone ever tried contacting the original authors and asking them to 
 change the license so it can fit in with pd's standard BSD ??

I've had the pleasure to meet Shahrokh Yadegari a few weeks back here in Weimar 
and asked him about just that. He said he always wanted to change the license 
to BSD.
IIRC it is based on some older code which has a  licence attached he can't 
change, so he would like to rewrite those parts but simply didn't find the time 
to do that yet.
On the website ( http://crca.ucsd.edu/~yadegari/expr.html ) is written:
“Based on original sources from IRCAM's jMax 
Released under GNU's General Public License.”

According to Shahrokh that would take him under a week to do but it was a 
matter of time/priority that it had not happened as of today.
So maybe asking him nicely could to the trick. Or send a voucher for week in a 
californian retreat...

Max

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] expr alternative