Tysen, On 2020-06-05 at 9:10 AM, "Moore, Tysen" <tysen_mo...@mentor.com> wrote: >Ranier,
>My reasoning for my initial email was not to cause a big fight in this list. Everyone knows you didn't mean for that to happen. The "big fight" you are seeing is just people who like to fight to have a reason to fight. >I was bringing this to the attention of the list in case the maintainers or users were unaware of these issues. For that I thank you because I wasn't aware of those issues either. I wasn't expecting that because ALL the advertisement for IUP only brags about how free and unemcumbered they are in any way, shape, or form, but incorporating functions calls for GPL source code into your --> API <-- and then claiming they are "completely separate from your product" is not an accurate summary of what IUP is actually doing then. IUP is completely free and unemcumbered but you will find certain IUP API functions that are not. Which functions and which sofware that goes with those functions? Go look it up yourself. >I was also looking for some guidance for best practices to resolve these issues. Sometimes these things can only be settled by a disinterested third party with no conflict of interest ... or really, really nice lawyers. >My suggestion was for a benign change to the top level docs to clearly list third party code that one should be aware of. If the maintainers of IUP don't want to do this, that is their decision. Again, my thought was a suggestion for [apparently debatable] improvement. No harm. No HONEST person can fault you for doing the right thing. Like yourself, I too am waiting to see how IUP will respond to your innocent and objective observation(s). So far IUP's first response basically appears to be "Go look it up yourself", which isn't a good thing because that will only lead to websites all around the world having to put warnings in their advertisements about IUP having a few IUP API functions that are not a part of the IUP license but are GPL instead, all you have to do is just search through the source code and documentation for it and avoid it if you don't agree with GPL. At least now I am seeing them beginning to at least question the friendliness of any third party products (FFTW and PdfLib) that are "completely separately" but directly incorporated into the IUP API and zip file, so that is a good sign. So maybe what you did will have a good effect. Regards, Andres PS -- To make this picture complete to anyone on or off the IUP forums who may be monitoring this conversation (FBI? CIA? NSA? Some American-based privacy invading spy organization?), this is an important issue because some people religiously believe that GPL is great because it means software that can be freely accessed, used, changed, and shared, but other people believe that GPL can't be trusted because it was written by lawyers that don't actually work for them, number one, and two, because it appears to be a sneaky way for other people to steal your ideas for free and then make money off of it, and you will never get as much credit for it as they do, because you must release your application as freely accessible, usable, changeable, and sharable for them to peruse. _______________________________________________ Iup-users mailing list Iup-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iup-users
