On Tuesday, 13 August 2013 at 05:03:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 05:53:50 luminousone wrote:
I finely got around to checking the libx11 deimos project for
updates, i haven't updated in ages, and the github has a LGPL
license file included with it, is this intentional?, The opengl
deimos library does not contain this, are all of the deimos
projects LGPL, or is their some sort of error in this
repository
containing this?
Deimos projects have no relation to each other beyond the fact
that they're
all in the same group on github. They're simply D bindings to a
variety of
unrelated libraries which were written in C. So, the license of
one project
has no bearing on the license of another.
Given that they're bindings, I would expect them to have the
same license as
the original C code. In the case of flac, I outright copied the
copyrights from
the C code. It really doesn't make much sense IMHO to give the
bindings a
different license from the original. At best, you might be able
to get away
with marking them as Boost, but since you'd be using the
original library to
do anything, you'd still be restricted by its license. But I'm
not a lawyer,
so I don't know what all of the murky details are. It just
seemed simplest to
me to copy the copyrights over.
As for the opengl deimos project, I don't know what its license
is. It's
probably listed in the copyright notices in the files.
- Jonathan M Davis
Their are other opengl wrappers with various licenses, I am
actually more concered with the libx11 license, I need to be able
to statically link without surrendering my code to the lgpl
license.
The original license of Xlib I am pretty sure is the x11 license,
any idea who the maintainer of the libx11 deimos project is, such
that I may query them, before I relagate myself to writting a new
xlib wrapper?
I ask purely because I think their might be an error, not because
I am arguing the merits of the license, I just wanna be sure all
my ducks are in a row so to speak!
