Re: [Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-27 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi,

Nick Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Sun, Dec 22, 2002 at 05:24:03PM +, Adam D. Moss wrote:
  The goal (I thought) was to keep the lowest levels (GEGL etc)
  of GIMP's back-end LGPL.
 
 I don't see any reason to do that. Are any of us likely to benefit from
 (usually small and rather poor) developers ripping off these parts of
 The GIMP and re-using them in various dodgy shareware apps?

that was not the idea behind it. Rather the rationale to license
libgimp as LGPL was to allow for commercial closed-source plug-ins.
With the current plug-in design the library that needs to be linked to
a plug-in is rather small and it makes sense to keep it LGPL. As soon
as we start to move more of the GIMP's core functionality into
libraries we might however decide to license these as GPL. The
situation for commercial plug-ins wouldn't change, they could continue
to use the functionality provided thru the PDB.


Salut, Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer



Re: [Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-23 Thread Nick Lamb
On Sun, Dec 22, 2002 at 05:24:03PM +, Adam D. Moss wrote:
 The goal (I thought) was to keep the lowest levels (GEGL etc)
 of GIMP's back-end LGPL.

I don't see any reason to do that. Are any of us likely to benefit from
(usually small and rather poor) developers ripping off these parts of
The GIMP and re-using them in various dodgy shareware apps?

Is there an existing architecture that people will use instead if we
threaten them with the very reasonable terms of the GNU GPL?

Personally I think The GIMP has been exploited (not by any projects with
the name 'GIMP' in them, I hasten to add) more than enough as it is. If
someone has a proposal that requires more relaxed licensing then let them
bring forth the proposal FIRST. So far I'm not very happy with the results
of re-licensing and would be loathe to permit any further erosion.

I've always thought of VIPS (which is used extensively by some members of
my research group) as a very different type of app from The GIMP, but I
don't doubt that there's some commonality which could be exploited.

Nick.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer



Re: [Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-23 Thread Robert L Krawitz
   Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:52:57 +
   From: Nick Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]

   Personally I think The GIMP has been exploited (not by any projects
   with the name 'GIMP' in them, I hasten to add) more than enough as
   it is. If someone has a proposal that requires more relaxed
   licensing then let them bring forth the proposal FIRST. So far I'm
   not very happy with the results of re-licensing and would be loathe
   to permit any further erosion.

As the lead for one of those non-exploitive projects that uses GIMP
in the name, I concur.

We've never seriously considered relicensing Gimp-print.  We've also
never gotten any serious pressure to; commercial vendors (in
particular, Epson) have no trouble with the GPL license.  I'd
personally rather not LGPL any of it because even the low level
infrastructure could be useful for, say, a printer vendor that wanted
to create a proprietary driver.  I'd also really rather somebody not
write, say, a proprietary dither algorithm and try to sell the package
without source.

I take a rather dim view of those who believe that there's some kind
of inherent right to take communal code, make improvements, and then
redistribute the combination in proprietary fashion (Microsoft in
particular, but they're not the only ones).  I'm rather more
sympathetic to those who have something that's truly free source, but
incompatible with the GPL for some minor reason, but it's not clear to
me how to solve that problem.

-- 
Robert Krawitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]  

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lead for Gimp Print   --http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works.
--Eric Crampton
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer



Re: [Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-22 Thread Adam D. Moss
David Hodson wrote:
 
 Adam D. Moss wrote:
 
   unfortunately the back-end is GPL
  which scuppers any realistic plans of GIMP's own back-end being able
  to move to it, I think.
 
 Eh? This doesn't appear to make sense.

The goal (I thought) was to keep the lowest levels (GEGL etc)
of GIMP's back-end LGPL.

-- 
Adam D. Moss   . ,,^^   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.foxbox.org/   co:3
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer



Re: [Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-21 Thread Adam D. Moss
Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
 I saw this program and thought it might be interesting to GIMP users and
 developers.
 http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
 
 Hopefully Gimp 2.0/GEGL/PUPUS will use some of the ideas there.

Development on PuPus stopped a long time ago due to time constraints.
I posted a message over a year ago making that clear (and offering
the prototype code so far, FWIW), but I thought I'd better just
remind people of that fact now since the name has reared it head
again multiple times in the last couple of weeks.

I looked at vips/nip just recently.  The most exciting thing about
it was that it seems to implement most of the interesting parts
of the PuPus idea, namely the pull-driven lazy processing and a
network of region-based dependancies.  It also supports lots of
exciting pixel formats and colours spaces.

The user interface is completely horrifying, though, at least from
the point of view of someone who expects something even vaguely
resembling a retouching or painting program (the front-end 'nip'
doesn't really claim to be that, though).

Fortunately its region-deps and image-processing back-end is well-
separated from its user-interface; unfortunately the back-end is GPL
which scuppers any realistic plans of GIMP's own back-end being able
to move to it, I think.

--Adam
-- 
Adam D. Moss   . ,,^^   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.foxbox.org/   co:3
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer



[Gimp-developer] A Free Software project of interest.

2002-12-20 Thread Nathan Carl Summers
I saw this program and thought it might be interesting to GIMP users and
developers.
http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/

Hopefully Gimp 2.0/GEGL/PUPUS will use some of the ideas there.

Rockwalrus



___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer