On Monday 11 Apr 2005 23:19, Paul Davis wrote:
> > longer easy to get working, it's apparently been superseded (has
> > anyone actually seen xfst? I haven't),
>
> torben has done a couple of small test releases to people he
> communicates with via IRC.
Ah. No point talking about it here then.
> >and it's never been properly licenced.
>
> the license situation is never going to be clear until Steinberg
> clean up their act.
No, the licence situation is clear enough I think. It just isn't very
satisfactory. You can't legally link anything that uses the Steinberg
headers into a GPL application and distribute the results as a binary,
with or without source. dssi-vst is a plugin with very particular
licensing -- this legal situation is one reason it is a plugin in the
first place, instead of being something built-in to Rosegarden.
People from Steinberg have indicated on several occasions that they
would happily change the VST SDK licence to BSD or similar. (Well, you
know that, and probably more for all I know.) It just never seems to
have actually happened.
Chris
Received on Tue Apr 12 04:15:13 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 12 2005 - 04:15:13 EEST