Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I honestly am not sure what the process for moving code to libgimp
is... essentially it is just moving the code to a library, and
then adding a wrapper (if required) around those functions to
expose them to the PDB.
Good technical
Hi Robin,
Robin Rowe wrote:
Good technical anwer, thanks.
Apparently I got it wrong.
Anyway - I just improved my understanding with a concrete example.
Let's take gimp_layer_add_alpha() as the example (the function adds an alpha
channel to an RGB background layer that doesn't have one yet).
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My understanding came from looking at libgimpthumb
Well, I was talking about libgimp explicitely since I think that's
what the question was all about. Of course libgimpbase, libgimpcolor,
libgimpmath, libgimpthumb and libgimpwidgets play a completely
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Following what you (Sven) said in the previous mail, it also seems
like the libgimp parts are independent of the original code, and calls
the original functions via a PDB proxy, so licence issues wouldn't
come into it.
Well, there are
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A GIMP plug-in is a completely different process space than the GIMP
core. Information is passed via a wire protocol which is implemented
at both ends using LGPL code. I don't see how this is different from
viewing the GIMP as a server, and the
Dave Neary wrote:
I write a GPL network daemon (say red carpet). Someone write a non-GPL
compliant client (say an LGPL encapsulation of the RedCarpet XML-RPC
protocol to allow proprietary implementations). Now that library is
calling GPL code, albeit via a network protocol. Is the client
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 01:12:03PM +0200, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But let's take an example...
I write a GPL network daemon (say red carpet). Someone write a non-GPL
compliant client (say an LGPL encapsulation of the RedCarpet XML-RPC
protocol to allow proprietary
Hi,
I guess since we explicitly exempt libgimp and plug-ins, this discussion is
purely of academic interest. Anyway - it interests me enough to ask a couple of
questions.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann ) wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 01:12:03PM +0200, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I have put together a first pass at a plug-in for working
with exif data -- the code can be downloaded from the registry,
at http://registry.gimp.org/plugin?id=4153
It places itself in the menu as Filters-Generic-Exif Browser.
Here are the contents of the README file:
GIMP Exif
From: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Could you read the sketchpad.pdf and check how it differs from
how the path tool is handled?
It would be your task to explain to explain to me what you want. As I
said earlier I am quite satisfied with the way it works now.
No. It is better that some of you
Hi,
Juhana Sadeharju [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Last I ckecked, your framework in Path Tool was not used in the
rectangle selection tool nor in crop tool. Can you put your
framework to a form in which I may use it to code new unirectangle
and new crop tool for us? We need not to check new
Dave Neary wrote:
A GIMP plug-in is a completely different process space than the GIMP
core. Information is passed via a wire protocol which is implemented at
both ends using LGPL code. I don't see how this is different from
viewing the GIMP as a server, and the plug-in as a client. Or
[while this is a rant, there is useful content in this mail]
Juhana Sadeharju ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
From:Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bashing on the current vectors framework since obviosuly you didn't
even look at it yet.
The Path Tool framework was just mentioned to me.
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:55:31PM +0200, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
into another language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without
limitation in the term modification.)
I've read and re-read this, and I'm having trouble figuring out how anyone
can consider a network
Sven,
Just to clarify for others reading along, my question is not about linking
GPL and LGPL. It is about cut-and-pasting code from GPL into LGPL during
refactoring. With the benefit of hindsight years later, it seems a
maintainer doing code clean-up should find application code that would
Hi,
Marc A. Lehmann wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:55:31PM +0200, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
big snip
So I hope it's very clear now that it depends.
Ummm.. no. And getting unclearer all the time.
Get used to it. The unclearness is *precisely* :) what this is about.
Hi Robin,
Robin Rowe wrote:
How do you get permission to move GIMP code from GPL into LGPL?
Basically we do this so rarely that is hasn't been a problem so far to
get permissions from everyone who touched the code in question.
For years you have been saying that something that makes
Hi,
Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pardon me if I misspoke based on recollection. I have now referred
back to your post of December 2, 2002. You said:
[ We often apply patches from people that don't have CVS commit
access. I'd like to see the names of the patch authors in the list of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann ) writes:
According to you, this shouldn't be. Additionally, one would assume that
these are additional restrictions that are explicitly forbidden by the GPL
itself.
But these restrictions are placed by the MySQL copyright holders
themselves, aren't
Welcome to Gimp-Print 5.0 Alpha 3! Please read these release notes
carefully.
Gimp-Print 5.0.0-alpha3 is the third alpha release (technology
preview) in the line that will eventually lead to Gimp-Print 5.0. It
is based on the 4.3 series that has been in development for two years,
and includes
Dave, Robin, Sven et al:
Although the word refactoring seems to have gained acceptance in the
world of commercial software and technology services, it doesn't seem to
be brought up very often in the context of open source development. Not
never, just rarely. Something similar might be observed
21 matches
Mail list logo
