I agree with Cory. However, think that you can compare this discussion with the licence of Mysql, wich is GPL if the application is non commercial or GPL, and they have a possibility to make a commercial licence for closed source software using their librairies. It is quite the same problematic, and ofr what I know, mysql is in Ubuntu (for lamp servers)
So waiting for a statement of linuxsampler team is a good thing, but imho we can package and distribute linuxsampler in Ubuntu. Toine Yvan Vander Sanden a écrit : > Luis de Bethencourt wrote: > >> If you say it is so close to gpl... Why don't they license it gpl or >> any other known license with a foundation behind? >> >> When a linuxsampler developer gives me a valid purpose I will start >> agreeing with them. Or they license it gpl or any other free license >> for that matter, we will ship it by default. >> >> For now, they have their own license, which is never cool. And that >> license has ambiguos terms as you mention, that can be taken to be >> very free or dictatorship. As a contributor to a distro that deploys >> software to a _LOT_ of people. I can't take the risk of >> misinterpreting a license, and breaking it, or even worse, making the >> users break it. >> >> Not talking about you, Yvan, but most end users don't care about >> licenses. So we have to care for us and for them. Sadly enough, free >> software development isn't excempt of a lot of legal issues (which are >> boring and tedious). >> >> > I agree. It is a sound reason to refuse software if it's not GPL. I was > only worried because I thought there was a misinterpretation, and a > judgment made for the wrong reasons could polarize people. As a final > point I'd like to mention i don't use samplers myself. So it doesn't > have anything to do with my personal preferences. > > Regards, > > yvan > > -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
