Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-06-08 Thread Adam D. Moss

Sven Neumann wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Since I've touched app/xcf.[ch] too:
 
 I hereby give my permission for anyone to use the portions of xcf.c
 that I have written under the terms of the LGPL.

Oh yeah, same here.

-- 
Adam D. Moss. ,,^^[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.foxbox.org/

"... for a man who flies from his fear may find that he has only
 taken a short cut to meet it."



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-06-05 Thread Sven Neumann

Hi,

Since I've touched app/xcf.[ch] too:

I hereby give my permission for anyone to use the portions of xcf.c
that I have written under the terms of the LGPL.

Please note that we consider to add a thumbnail of the image
composition to the XCF file format. This might even happen before 
1.2...


Salut, Sven




Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-31 Thread Alan Cox

 Until very recently the code in xcf.c and xcf.h had no copyright notices
 at all in them.  I don't think this puts those files into the public domain
 but I think it does indicate that the authors may be flexible in their
 licensing terms. 

Actually it indicates there are no rights to use the file granted at all!



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-31 Thread Marc Lehmann

On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 03:34:17AM +, Jay Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Until very recently the code in xcf.c and xcf.h had no copyright notices
 at all in them.  I don't think this puts those files into the public domain

A copyright notice has not much to do with the license in most parts of
the world. According to the Berne convention (something the US has signed
but not ratified yet for example) anything you find which doesn't have an
explicit license mustn't be used, looked at, copied etc..., thus giving
authors a maximum of assurance.

 I hereby give my permission for anyone to use the portions of xcf.c
 that I have written under the terms of the LGPL.

The problem, of course, will be SP, which are very difficult to
contact. It took quite a long time until I had the license changed from
GPL to LGPL for a single file in libgimp, so whoever weants the license
changed should act soon ;)

-- 
  -==- |
  ==-- _   |
  ---==---(_)__  __   __   Marc Lehmann  +--
  --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /   [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
  -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\   XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation   |
 |



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Phil Schwan

On May 30, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
 However, there is the issue of licensing.  Gdk-pixbuf is released
 under the LGPL, and the XCF loader uses big chunks of GPLed code from
 the GIMP.  I am not sure what is the best way to proceed.
 
 I would appreciate your suggestions.

Do you know who all of the copyright holders of that code are?

-Phil



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Havoc Pennington


Federico Mena Quintero [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
 However, there is the issue of licensing.  Gdk-pixbuf is released
 under the LGPL, and the XCF loader uses big chunks of GPLed code from
 the GIMP.  I am not sure what is the best way to proceed.
 

Well, there are not many options.

 a) You find all the authors of that GPL code and get the license
   changed (avoiding this mess is the advantage of copyright
   assignment...)

 b) You don't include the code in gdk-pixbuf
 
 c) You do a clean-room reimplementation of the code

Havoc





Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread kelly

On Tue, 30 May 2000 11:27:37 -0400, Phil Schwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

Do you know who all of the copyright holders of that code are?

At least myself, Peter, Spencer, and Adam Moss.  There are almost
certainly others.

Kelly



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Austin Donnelly

On Tuesday, 30 May 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Tue, 30 May 2000 11:27:37 -0400, Phil Schwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 
 Do you know who all of the copyright holders of that code are?
 
 At least myself, Peter, Spencer, and Adam Moss.  There are almost
 certainly others.

I can't remember if it was me or Jay Cox which added the resolution
property reading/writing code.  But if it was me, I hereby give
permission for the licence on my portions to be changed to LGPL.

Austin



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Michael Natterer

Austin Donnelly wrote:
 
 On Tuesday, 30 May 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  On Tue, 30 May 2000 11:27:37 -0400, Phil Schwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 
  Do you know who all of the copyright holders of that code are?
 
  At least myself, Peter, Spencer, and Adam Moss.  There are almost
  certainly others.
 
 I can't remember if it was me or Jay Cox which added the resolution
 property reading/writing code.  But if it was me, I hereby give
 permission for the licence on my portions to be changed to LGPL.

I did the GimpUnit loading/saving stuff. Go ahead and make it LGPL.

BTW, I'd suggest that we put the xcf code into a library for Gimp 2.0.
Gdk-Pixbuf and whatever-image-viewer will then use the same code as
The GIMP for loading XCFs.

ciao,
--Mitch



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Jens Finke

On 30 May 2000, Havoc Pennington wrote:
 Federico Mena Quintero [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
  However, there is the issue of licensing.  Gdk-pixbuf is released
  under the LGPL, and the XCF loader uses big chunks of GPLed code from
  the GIMP.  I am not sure what is the best way to proceed.
  
 
 Well, there are not many options.
 
  a) You find all the authors of that GPL code and get the license
changed (avoiding this mess is the advantage of copyright
assignment...)

  b) You don't include the code in gdk-pixbuf
  
  c) You do a clean-room reimplementation of the code

I think c) is the best solution. It's surely quite hard to find _all_ 
contributors to the code. And b) isn't a good solution if you imagine what
cool applications could be done with a xcf-loader module (e.g. nice image
cataloging tools).

Also there are a lot of modifications to the original gimp code in the
xcf-loader yet. So a clean rewrite is probably the best solution for
everyone.

Regards,
  Jens




Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread kelly

On Tue, 30 May 2000 20:04:02 +0200 (MEST), Jens Finke [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

I think c) is the best solution. It's surely quite hard to find _all_
contributors to the code.

Actually, I think that the version that was initially put into CVS was 
pure SP, so the CVS log should adequately document all contributors
since then.

Kelly



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Martin Baulig

Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Federico Mena Quintero [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
  However, there is the issue of licensing.  Gdk-pixbuf is released
  under the LGPL, and the XCF loader uses big chunks of GPLed code from
  the GIMP.  I am not sure what is the best way to proceed.
  
 
 Well, there are not many options.
 
  a) You find all the authors of that GPL code and get the license
changed (avoiding this mess is the advantage of copyright
assignment...)
 
  b) You don't include the code in gdk-pixbuf
  
  c) You do a clean-room reimplementation of the code

What's wrong with

  d) Keep the XCF loaded GPL

if I understand that correctly, the loaders are shared libraries which
dnyamically loaded so they can theoretically have different licenses
or do I miss something ?

Sure, I'd prefer a) - but IMO d) is much better than b) or even c).

-- 
Martin Baulig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (private)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Martin Baulig

Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Martin Baulig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
d) Keep the XCF loaded GPL
  
  if I understand that correctly, the loaders are shared libraries which
  dnyamically loaded so they can theoretically have different licenses
  or do I miss something ?
  
 
 RMS claims that this is not allowed without GPL'ing all of
 gdk-pixbuf. Otherwise you could just dlopen() any GPL app from your
 proprietary app.

Well, then I think you misunderstood me.

What I suggested was added XCF as a nice add-on to gdk-pixbuf for
the situation where gdk-pixbuf is used under the GPL.

Of cause, this means that you can't use XCF loading in a proprietary
app where you use gdk-pixbuf under the LGPL.

-- 
Martin Baulig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (private)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)



Re: XCF loader for gdk-pixbuf

2000-05-30 Thread Martin Baulig

Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Martin Baulig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 
  Well, then I think you misunderstood me.
  
  What I suggested was added XCF as a nice add-on to gdk-pixbuf for
  the situation where gdk-pixbuf is used under the GPL.
  
  Of cause, this means that you can't use XCF loading in a proprietary
  app where you use gdk-pixbuf under the LGPL.
 
 Maybe. It's a big can of worms though - can Red Hat and SuSE ship the
 XCF add-on, for example? Probably not.

Hmm, yes.

-- 
Martin Baulig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (private)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)