[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Peter Wang wrote:
> On 2008-08-26, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Peter Wang wrote:
> > > On 2008-08-26, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Peter Wang wrote:
> > > > > What's the situation with the licence? The top of the header file
> > > > > is a bit scary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, I would prefer to move the file to
> > > > > allegro5/internal/oss/soundcard.h or something.
> > > > >
> > > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, that file is GPLv2, we can't use it, let alone include it
> > > > without relicensing Allegro something GPL compatible.
> > >
> > > I know this isn't what you meant, but to be explicit: Allegro *is* GPL
> > > compatible.
> >
> > I'm not so sure it is. BSD isn't.
>
> Wrong. See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses
>
> Modified BSD license
>
> This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the
> advertising clause. It is a simple, permissive non-copyleft free
> software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.
>
> > You have to have the same sorts of
> > restrictions in order to be GPL compatible.
>
> False. Look at all the licences on the list above which are compatible.
>
> > We have none, its basically the
> > DWTFYW license.
>
> DWTFYW, including combining with GPL-licensed code.
>
> Peter
>
Ok, I'll buy that. but what about people then using Allegro? They then have to
adopt a gpl license, which isn't something we currently force. The GPL crosses
library/app boundaries.
--
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx