On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 09:20:29PM +0100, Glynn Clements wrote: > > Markus Neteler wrote: > > > Yes: these files you have to obtain from the OpenDesign Alliance. > > AFAIK we could distribute binaries of v.in.dwg if there were dynamic > > DWGDirect libraries available, but they aren't (at least not some months > > ago). Since they only provide static libraries (.a instead of .so), they get > > compiled into GRASS and hence fall under the "no distribution" restriction. > > It doesn't make any difference whether the libraries are static or > dynamic. > > Unless you can supply the OpenDWG/DWGDirect source code under a > GPL-compatible licence, you cannot distribute a binary which is linked > (statically or dynamically) against both the GRASS libraries and the > DWG libraries.
would it be possible to create a standalone binary that converts from DWG into GRASS-internal data structures, which could be accessed if it exists from inside GRASS? then this binary could have a licensing structure separate from GPL. this would make it a lot easier to separately maintain and compile that code in a one-click fashion, reducing the barrier to use. does this make sense? .b _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
