Re: [Gimp-developer] ANNOUNCE: GIMP Plug-In Template 1.3.0

2003-03-06 Thread Raphaël Quinet
On 06 Mar 2003 18:47:12 +0100, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] And I replied some silly things... Hmmm... Looks like I misread Sven's message. I thought that you wanted the option of having a license _with_ advertising clause. I did not see the "o" in "w/o". Silly me! So of co

Re: [Gimp-developer] ANNOUNCE: GIMP Plug-In Template 1.3.0

2003-03-06 Thread Adam D. Moss
Raphaël Quinet wrote: I'd suggest dual licensing: 1 - "old-style" BSD with advertising clause 2 - GPL or LGPL I was in the process of moving the code to the following XFree-style license if that's okay. I don't see the utility in dual-licensing since either of the above can trivially subsume the p

Re: [Gimp-developer] ANNOUNCE: GIMP Plug-In Template 1.3.0

2003-03-06 Thread Adam D. Moss
Sven Neumann wrote: Nice work! Is there any chance that this could be licensed BSD/X11-style to encourage its adoption as the base for non-GPL plugins too? Mitch and me don't see any problem to relicense gimp-plugin-template. Cool. Should perhaps even be something w/o an advertising clause?! Oh d

Re: [Gimp-developer] ANNOUNCE: GIMP Plug-In Template 1.3.0

2003-03-06 Thread Raphaël Quinet
On 06 Mar 2003 18:47:12 +0100, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Adam D. Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Nice work! Is there any chance that this could be licensed > > BSD/X11-style to encourage its adoption as the base for non-GPL > > plugins too? > > Mitch and me don't see any pr

Re: [Gimp-developer] ANNOUNCE: GIMP Plug-In Template 1.3.0

2003-03-06 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, "Adam D. Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nice work! Is there any chance that this could be licensed > BSD/X11-style to encourage its adoption as the base for non-GPL > plugins too? Mitch and me don't see any problem to relicense gimp-plugin-template. Should perhaps even be something w/o