On 3/28/07, Chris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 08:37:46PM -0400, Chuckk Hubbard wrote: > > Was PD previously under GPL? > > No.
Frank explained to me that Pd-extended is under GPL. I have to go back and revise the package I created, if only to add the Berkley license info. I'm pretty sure I didn't actually use the executable that was with Pd-extended. So if version 0.5 is available under BSD license, and the author later decides to go GPL, could they replace vs 0.5 on sourceforge with an exact copy except with a different license.txt? And if someone then downloaded that same software, aware that it was BSD, and violated GPL thinking it was still BSD... A moot point anyway. I swear I looked once and saw GPL for Pd, but I guess it was Pd-extended. Suffice to say Csound is LGPL and AFAIK completely open. -Chuckk -- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list