[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] PNG reading
- From: Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:22:14 -0800
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=nPImiYpm0j4Jh3lX3SrcQ3eHnDJ1tpZvNmH4q2JAsQOCIFqmT79EDi6723cFQoWxJ/PDc4SpNTHQNzGOPLZWhb0xB2PL735rl2MGGdKs2ue5x2KmT/5CBd0R2rPePmbH8uDT0tvk8DYYiISVDIModhSSERQOKYTCuN3sajfTmeU=
On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:06, Catatonic Porpoise wrote:
> That is plainly untrue. The zlib license contains
> restrictions; Allegro's license does not.
Technically, Allegro's does. If oyu use Allegro, you're supposed to give
something back. The only things in the zlib license are "Don't misrepresent
the software's origin", "Altered versions must be marked as such", and "the
source must contain a copy of this license". AFAIK, Allegro already has these
restrictions for itself.
But even still, zlib's license only applies to zlib itself. If you bundle zlib
with something else, that something else can retain its own license.