Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: proposed initial DTD for LADSPA-gui-xml .. licensing issues ...
From: David Olofson (david_AT_gardena.net)
Date: Mon Nov 27 2000 - 02:27:25 EET
On Sunday 26 November 2000 14:58, Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
> >IMHO you would need to make it LGPL (perhaps it already is ?) in
> > order to make it usable by both opensource apps and commercial,
> > closed source apps.
>
> I don't release code under the LGPL. I don't *want* my code used by
> closed source applications. End of story.
(I'm not going to tell anyone what license to use; just explain my
POV. And note that this is really about the general case; not this
particular case.)
I'd want the same for some things I'm working on, but not all.
Basically, libraries for applications and tools should be GPLed, as
we don't like closed source apps and tools anyway, especially not in
the longer perspective.
Libraries for games and other things that are more related to artwork
(ie things that don't make much sense to develop as Free/Open Source)
should be LGPLed.
As to audio plugins and similar "artistic" kinds of software, the
decision is a lot harder. The LGPL opens up the possibility of closed
source being a threat to the popularity of Free/Open alternatives,
and a threat to the Freedom of the users. OTOH, the GPL rules out
closed source appications, which might force users to use that Other
OS just because the Free alternatives don't cut it.
I'd love to use a studio where every single plugin and application is
Free/Open Source, but there are two issues that worry me:
1) Will Free/Open Source solutions be as "polished" and functional
as the current closed source solutions?
2) Will shutting the closed source alternatives out slow down
progress?
As to 1), seeing what's going on around here, looking at KDE 2 etc,
makes this seem less of an issue. KDE 2 is already looking better
than the Win2k desktop, and it's not lacking much functionality. It's
possible that the Linux audio community is a bit on the small side,
but I think there is hope.
When it comes to 2), that's the hard one. If we invite the Big Guys
to write Linux apps that support our plugin APIs and other standards,
it will result in a reduction of the motivation to rewrite the same
applications from scratch as Free/Open Source. However, it'll also
bring more users and more potential developers to the community.
Which one of these effects will have the strongest impact?
Anyway if I were to do what feels Right, seeing to the longer
perspective, I'd probably drop the "L" in the MAIA license. OTOH,
that might be just a bit too drastic, especially since MAIA could be
used in games and that kind of stuff as well, and because I don't
have the definitive answers to the above questions. I might want to
purchase the latest Waves plugin pack for Linux some day, even though
it'll most probably be closed source...
> If someone is writing a close source application, they'll have to
> write their own backend or use someone's else's non-GPL one. Please
> note that the backend should not be considered a standard. The
> standard here is the XML DTD. Writing a backend for it is a day's
> work for an experienced GUI programmer who has the widgets
> available.
Ok. That basically means that you're working on an implementation
rather than a standard, which means the above doesn't really apply.
(One could claim that you're not making it easier for the closed
source folks when you could, but then again, 1) they deserve it, 2)
it's no big deal in this case and 3) one should shut up and
reimplement the thing if one doesn't agree with your license!)
[...]
> There are two good books on GTK+, both of them online at
> gtk.org. Havoc Pennington's book is a little better in some
> specific regards, but is aimed at developers planning on going all
> the way to GNOME. Harlow's book isn't as clear about the things
> Havoc is clear on, but his focus doesn't include GNOME, which is a
> benefit if you're starting out.
Might be a benefit *period*, if you're not into coding for any
specific desktop environment at all.
//David
.- M u C o S -------------------------. .- David Olofson --------.
| A Free/Open Source | | Audio Hacker |
| Plugin and Integration Standard | | Linux Advocate |
| for | | Open Source Advocate |
| Professional and Consumer | | Singer |
| Multimedia | | Songwriter |
`-----> http://www.linuxdj.com/mucos -' `---> david_AT_linuxdj.com -'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Nov 27 2000 - 05:54:30 EET