Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
We're using Ubuntu's bzr to let multiple people work on reviewing the code. Nicolas Maufrais wrote: > Hello, > > Any news about that subject, guys? > > Nicolas. > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Hello, Any news about that subject, guys? Nicolas. -- ~~ ~ BOYCOTT SUSE & NOVELL (C)(TM)(R) MICRO$OFT ~ ~~ ~I DO LIKE AND SUPPORT GPL VERSION 3 ~ ~~ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
what about softlinking to the system fonts from the cinelerra font dir? On Friday, 2. February 2007 12:31, muzzol wrote: > 2007/2/2, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > /usr/lib/cinlerra/fonts > > > > no, it is not configurable... > > it is limited to one dir? i'll open a new bug ticket if is possible to > add more than one dir for fonts. even if this is hardcoded could be > usefull adding tipical font locations (/usr/share/fonts). -- dr.k.g.hooss schoepfung & wandel wissenschaftliche medienberatung breite strasse 6-8, d-23617 luebeck www.schoepfung-und-wandel.de ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, muzzol wrote: > is not possible to substitute those fonts with free ones? there's lot > of free ttf fonts around. There are actually very few *really* free TTF files around. Almost all the "free" fonts you see are either commercial and distributed in violation of copyright, or different types of shareware distributed under restrictions like "personal use only" that would violate DFSG. There's also a problem of free replacements for commercial fonts, which don't always have correct metadata - for instance, a file called "Helvetica" is much more often some kind of Arial derivative, because real Helvetica is jealously guarded by commercial interests. Probably the best source for free TTF fonts is existing free software packages. For instance, if we were interested in Postscript fonts, there's a nice collection of them included with Ghostscript for which somebody else has already done the work of license clearing. I think some X servers may come with really-free TTF fonts. -- Matthew Skala [EMAIL PROTECTED]Embrace and defend. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Friday 02 February 2007 4:31 am, Andraž Tori wrote: > On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 10:01 +0100, Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof wrote: > > muzzol schreef: > > >> So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? > > > > > > theorically you must watch it one by one. practically this is > > > impossible, at least for one person. > > > > > > how many files contains the cinelerra source package? > > > > I found already one file that is LGPL: ladspa.h in /cinelerra. > > great, this is progress! Mark it as such ... > > > And what about the fonts (like arial)? > > as far as i can guess they are from MS core fonts package. they are > definitely not under licence that would be DFSG compatible, so they > should probably be excluded from main debian/ubuntu version. > > which directly means crippling cinlerra from titling capabilities in > those versions. Andraz, you could replace them with the Deja Font-Family. Also, is ther a way cinelerra be set up to look for fonts in a user's ~/.fonts directory? Wes > > bye > andraž > > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- "The only way to stay sane in an insane world is to be insane." --Me ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
2007/2/2, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: /usr/lib/cinlerra/fonts no, it is not configurable... it is limited to one dir? i'll open a new bug ticket if is possible to add more than one dir for fonts. even if this is hardcoded could be usefull adding tipical font locations (/usr/share/fonts). -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 11:57 +0100, muzzol wrote: > > Or maybe you can make it possible for people to install them manually or > > let Cin use the fonts installed on the system. If someone has > > msttcorefonts installed, he/she can use them in cin. > > > > that sounds great. what are the default paths that cinelerra search > for fonts? is that configurable? /usr/lib/cinlerra/fonts no, it is not configurable... bye andraž > > -- > > ^ ^ > O O > (_ _) > muzzol(a)gmail.com > > jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk > > No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. > No els hi agrada. > > "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y > catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" > Jiménez Losantos > > > bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies > > <)ޕjf)+- <)ޕj(bgmx)鮉ff(bgbا~܊wz ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Or maybe you can make it possible for people to install them manually or let Cin use the fonts installed on the system. If someone has msttcorefonts installed, he/she can use them in cin. that sounds great. what are the default paths that cinelerra search for fonts? is that configurable? -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies )ޕ��jf��)��+- )ޕ��j�(��b��g�mx��)鮉��f��f���(��b��g��b�ا~�܊w�z�
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 11:26 +0100, muzzol wrote: > 2007/2/2, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > as far as i can guess they are from MS core fonts package. they are > > definitely not under licence that would be DFSG compatible, so they > > should probably be excluded from main debian/ubuntu version. > > > > which directly means crippling cinlerra from titling capabilities in > > those versions. > > > > is not possible to substitute those fonts with free ones? there's lot > of free ttf fonts around. As long as they are truetype, no problem, but please do not do this in the 'normal' build, since font-compatibility between different versions of cinelerra used in production environments has to be perserved. For the 'cleaned up' build, substitute them with something else... bye andraž ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
muzzol schreef: 2007/2/2, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: as far as i can guess they are from MS core fonts package. they are definitely not under licence that would be DFSG compatible, so they should probably be excluded from main debian/ubuntu version. which directly means crippling cinlerra from titling capabilities in those versions. is not possible to substitute those fonts with free ones? there's lot of free ttf fonts around. Or maybe you can make it possible for people to install them manually or let Cin use the fonts installed on the system. If someone has msttcorefonts installed, he/she can use them in cin. ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
2007/2/2, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: as far as i can guess they are from MS core fonts package. they are definitely not under licence that would be DFSG compatible, so they should probably be excluded from main debian/ubuntu version. which directly means crippling cinlerra from titling capabilities in those versions. is not possible to substitute those fonts with free ones? there's lot of free ttf fonts around. -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies )ޕ��jf��)��+- )ޕ��j�(��b��g�mx��)鮉��f��f���(��b��g��b�ا~�܊w�z�
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 10:01 +0100, Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof wrote: > muzzol schreef: > >> So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? > >> > > > > theorically you must watch it one by one. practically this is > > impossible, at least for one person. > > > > how many files contains the cinelerra source package? > > > > I found already one file that is LGPL: ladspa.h in /cinelerra. great, this is progress! Mark it as such ... > And what about the fonts (like arial)? as far as i can guess they are from MS core fonts package. they are definitely not under licence that would be DFSG compatible, so they should probably be excluded from main debian/ubuntu version. which directly means crippling cinlerra from titling capabilities in those versions. bye andraž ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
2007/2/2, Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: muzzol schreef: >> So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? >> > > theorically you must watch it one by one. practically this is > impossible, at least for one person. > > how many files contains the cinelerra source package? > I found already one file that is LGPL: ladspa.h in /cinelerra. And what about the fonts (like arial)? the fonts is a known problem. we should change it to free ones. ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
muzzol schreef: So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? theorically you must watch it one by one. practically this is impossible, at least for one person. how many files contains the cinelerra source package? I found already one file that is LGPL: ladspa.h in /cinelerra. And what about the fonts (like arial)? ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? theorically you must watch it one by one. practically this is impossible, at least for one person. how many files contains the cinelerra source package? -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Nicolas Maufrais schreef: On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 03:45:24PM -0500, Wesley T Allen wrote: On Thursday 01 February 2007 1:46 pm, Cory K. wrote: Well yes. Thats what we have to do. Go through every file to check for a license header. If theres none or a GLP header we're good. If there does happen to be one thats licensed otherwise we have to note that difference in the debian/copyright file. Is a manual scan necessary, or do license headers have some kind of typical syntax - if there's a typical syntax would using grep to scan for "license" be a good place to start? Hello, I don't thing greping for the word licence is a good idea. That's not because there's no licence header of any kind that you can make any assumption about its licence. Some applications or librairies doesn't have such headers in their sources. Mmmm... that sounds like Cinelerra, doesn't it? Moreover, some files could contain code from different applications. Nicolas Maufrais. So how will it be possible then to find out what license a file has? Jeroen ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 03:45:24PM -0500, Wesley T Allen wrote: > On Thursday 01 February 2007 1:46 pm, Cory K. wrote: > > Well yes. Thats what we have to do. Go through every file to check for a > > license header. If theres none or a GLP header we're good. If there does > > happen to be one thats licensed otherwise we have to note that > > difference in the debian/copyright file. > > Is a manual scan necessary, or do license headers have some kind of typical > syntax - if there's a typical syntax would using grep to scan for "license" > be a good place to start? Hello, I don't thing greping for the word licence is a good idea. That's not because there's no licence header of any kind that you can make any assumption about its licence. Some applications or librairies doesn't have such headers in their sources. Mmmm... that sounds like Cinelerra, doesn't it? Moreover, some files could contain code from different applications. Nicolas Maufrais. -- ~~ ~ BOYCOTT SUSE & NOVELL (C)(TM)(R) MICRO$OFT ~ ~~ ~I DO LIKE AND SUPPORT GPL VERSION 3 ~ ~~ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Wesley - Thats the plan. To grep through for typical words, "LGPL" "Artistic" "whatever". If nothing pops up we're just gonna submit the package for review. If we do see files that come up with other licenses we will have to go through all the files. Wesley T Allen wrote: > On Thursday 01 February 2007 1:46 pm, Cory K. wrote: > >> Well yes. Thats what we have to do. Go through every file to check for a >> license header. If theres none or a GLP header we're good. If there does >> happen to be one thats licensed otherwise we have to note that >> difference in the debian/copyright file. >> > > Is a manual scan necessary, or do license headers have some kind of typical > syntax - if there's a typical syntax would using grep to scan for "license" > be a good place to start? > > Wes > > >> Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof wrote: >> >>> Maybe it's a stupid question, but how can you make sure a file is or >>> isn't gpl? Should there be a header in the file containing the license >>> of it's lgpl or other? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Jeroen >>> >>> Cory K. schreef: >>> Ok. So heres what its coming down to. We have to do a full review of _every_ file to make sure their all GPL. We cant take it on faith. The license file is good enough for the admins as long as the other files dont conflict. So if we come across 1 file that is LGPL or Artistic licensed it will be rejected. We dont have to _add_ a license header for every file just make sure theres not one that conflicts. Nicolas Maufrais wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: > >> Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that >> gives us >> that. >> >> Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like >> Fedora >> or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues >> but >> they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros >> repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the >> work if >> you are willing to help. >> >> If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at >> #ubuntustudio on Freenode. >> > Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, > either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping > others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: > *** THANKS *** =) > > Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't > discourage > you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source > world. > > I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more > right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and > have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? > > I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug > Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved > by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for > example. > > Nicolas Maufrais. > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra >>> ___ >>> Cinelerra mailing list >>> Cinelerra@skolelinux.no >>> https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra >>> >> ___ >> Cinelerra mailing list >> Cinelerra@skolelinux.no >> https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra >> > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Thursday 01 February 2007 1:46 pm, Cory K. wrote: > Well yes. Thats what we have to do. Go through every file to check for a > license header. If theres none or a GLP header we're good. If there does > happen to be one thats licensed otherwise we have to note that > difference in the debian/copyright file. Is a manual scan necessary, or do license headers have some kind of typical syntax - if there's a typical syntax would using grep to scan for "license" be a good place to start? Wes > > Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof wrote: > > Maybe it's a stupid question, but how can you make sure a file is or > > isn't gpl? Should there be a header in the file containing the license > > of it's lgpl or other? > > > > Regards, > > > > Jeroen > > > > Cory K. schreef: > >> Ok. So heres what its coming down to. We have to do a full review of > >> _every_ file to make sure their all GPL. We cant take it on faith. The > >> license file is good enough for the admins as long as the other files > >> dont conflict. So if we come across 1 file that is LGPL or Artistic > >> licensed it will be rejected. > >> > >> We dont have to _add_ a license header for every file just make sure > >> theres not one that conflicts. > >> > >> Nicolas Maufrais wrote: > >>> On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: > Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that > gives us > that. > > Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like > Fedora > or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues > but > they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros > repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the > work if > you are willing to help. > > If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at > #ubuntustudio on Freenode. > >>> > >>> Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, > >>> either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping > >>> others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: > >>> *** THANKS *** =) > >>> > >>> Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't > >>> discourage > >>> you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source > >>> world. > >>> > >>> I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more > >>> right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and > >>> have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? > >>> > >>> I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug > >>> Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved > >>> by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for > >>> example. > >>> > >>> Nicolas Maufrais. > >> > >> ___ > >> Cinelerra mailing list > >> Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > >> https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > > > ___ > > Cinelerra mailing list > > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- "The only way to stay sane in an insane world is to be insane." --Me ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Well yes. Thats what we have to do. Go through every file to check for a license header. If theres none or a GLP header we're good. If there does happen to be one thats licensed otherwise we have to note that difference in the debian/copyright file. Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof wrote: > Maybe it's a stupid question, but how can you make sure a file is or > isn't gpl? Should there be a header in the file containing the license > of it's lgpl or other? > > Regards, > > Jeroen > > Cory K. schreef: >> Ok. So heres what its coming down to. We have to do a full review of >> _every_ file to make sure their all GPL. We cant take it on faith. The >> license file is good enough for the admins as long as the other files >> dont conflict. So if we come across 1 file that is LGPL or Artistic >> licensed it will be rejected. >> >> We dont have to _add_ a license header for every file just make sure >> theres not one that conflicts. >> >> Nicolas Maufrais wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: >>> Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us that. Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if you are willing to help. If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at #ubuntustudio on Freenode. >>> Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, >>> either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping >>> others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: >>> *** THANKS *** =) >>> >>> Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't >>> discourage >>> you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source >>> world. >>> >>> I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more >>> right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and >>> have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? >>> >>> I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug >>> Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved >>> by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for >>> example. >>> >>> Nicolas Maufrais. >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> Cinelerra mailing list >> Cinelerra@skolelinux.no >> https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Maybe it's a stupid question, but how can you make sure a file is or isn't gpl? Should there be a header in the file containing the license of it's lgpl or other? Regards, Jeroen Cory K. schreef: Ok. So heres what its coming down to. We have to do a full review of _every_ file to make sure their all GPL. We cant take it on faith. The license file is good enough for the admins as long as the other files dont conflict. So if we come across 1 file that is LGPL or Artistic licensed it will be rejected. We dont have to _add_ a license header for every file just make sure theres not one that conflicts. Nicolas Maufrais wrote: On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us that. Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if you are willing to help. If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at #ubuntustudio on Freenode. Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: *** THANKS *** =) Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't discourage you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source world. I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for example. Nicolas Maufrais. ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Ok. So heres what its coming down to. We have to do a full review of _every_ file to make sure their all GPL. We cant take it on faith. The license file is good enough for the admins as long as the other files dont conflict. So if we come across 1 file that is LGPL or Artistic licensed it will be rejected. We dont have to _add_ a license header for every file just make sure theres not one that conflicts. Nicolas Maufrais wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: > >> Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us >> that. >> >> Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora >> or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but >> they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros >> repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if >> you are willing to help. >> >> If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at >> #ubuntustudio on Freenode. >> > > Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, > either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping > others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: > *** THANKS *** =) > > Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't discourage > you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source > world. > > I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more > right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and > have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? > > I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug > Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved > by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for > example. > > Nicolas Maufrais. > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Cory K. wrote: > Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us > that. > > Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora > or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but > they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros > repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if > you are willing to help. > > If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at > #ubuntustudio on Freenode. Don't be mistaken. There are a lot of people here who help others, either by spending time developing, sharing their knowledge or helping others to install or use Cinelerra. BTW, to all of them, I say: *** THANKS *** =) Now, the fact that you don't receive immediate help shouldn't discourage you to improve things. That the way things work in the Open-Source world. I gave you some hints and references in my last mail. I can't do more right now, since I already spend enough time contributing each week and have a life. I assume that's the same for developers, isn't it? I personnaly prefer Hannes, for example, to continue to improve/debug Cinelerra than spending time on this licence issue, which can be solved by people such as you (or me, if I wasn't already busy enough) for example. Nicolas Maufrais. -- ~~ ~ BOYCOTT SUSE & NOVELL (C)(TM)(R) MICRO$OFT ~ ~~ ~I DO LIKE AND SUPPORT GPL VERSION 3 ~ ~~ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
What kind of help ? We have clarified all the issues we can clarify. Now we are waiting for patches that would bring cinelerra more in line with your policies for inclusion... we have also given you the assurance that patches will be accepted as long as they don't break anything, so any positive work done will surely not go to /dev/null. btw: it is also my wish not to clutter each and every C and h file with gpl header and just put it into every directory. if this is possible indeed, please do it this way. If you need authorship or licence clarification for specific files, we can probably collaboratively find the answers, as long as concrete problems are stated. i really think it's just about someone doing the dull work of checking the directories and files... bye andraz On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 11:54 -0500, Cory K. wrote: > Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us > that. > > Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora > or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but > they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros > repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if > you are willing to help. > > If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at > #ubuntustudio on Freenode. > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Look, in the end all we want is help. I havnt seen 1 post that gives us that. Lack of effort isnt the reason it hasnt made it into distros like Fedora or Debian. Their are issues. People may feel they are distro issues but they are issues none-the-less. Getting Cinelerra into distros repositories will only help Cinelerra. We are willing to do the work if you are willing to help. If anyone wants to be helpful please email me off-list or on IRC at #ubuntustudio on Freenode. ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
2007/2/1, Nicolas Maufrais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Getting Cinelerra to go in the official repositories of Debian *IS NOT* just about adding a few lines header to each sources file and deciding to be the maintainer. we know. this is actually the extra work we are doing to acomplish that goal. if we though was that easy we weren't here asking for help. Some thoughs: - Can we add headers in file we didn't developped ourselves? Only one person knows for sure where the code comes from, and that guy is Adam. I talked about those headers with a Debian packager some hours ago during an important Linux meeting in Paris. It seems those headers aren't really necessary. You can get an application to be accepted without those headers, even if it is strongly advised. yes (again). i sended a mail to HW and they confirmed that all is GPLd. - Cinelerra depends of packages which are in the officials reps, but those packages are sometimes modified, to get ride of patented stuff. Would Cinelerra work with such packages? yes, i've compiled fine without any extra repos/packages. - Debian RFP (request to package) and ITP (intend to package) have already been made in the past. Look at #78209 (RFP), #156614 (RFP), #239570 (RFP) and #331072 (ITP). well, our first intention is to package for ubuntu. we hope this will revitalize that ITP that was zombie for years. lot of people have packaged cinelerra but no one taked the enough time/job for resolving the problems of including it on the repos. - Legal advice can be obtain on the Debian-legal mailing-list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal - Each Debian package must be accompanied by a "copyright" file, installed in /usr/share/doc/. Each contributor should be given proper credit and copyright notice in that file. - The way copyrights are tracked down in Cinelerra-CV could be improved. Fortunately, thanks to the revision system we used, we are able to give contributors proper credits in the future if this is needed. ok - The licence problem has been debated *OVER AND OVER* on this mailing-list and on the IRC (1 time per month approximately). Each time, the same questions and suggestions are made. I suggest creating a new page in the wiki about the licence issue, where all the information would be centralized. the root problem is over. cinelerra IS GPL as the author says. we can find little problems with some modifications that can be resolved with help from developers (credits to right people, external project code, etc). -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Getting Cinelerra to go in the official repositories of Debian *IS NOT* just about adding a few lines header to each sources file and deciding to be the maintainer. Some thoughs: - Can we add headers in file we didn't developped ourselves? Only one person knows for sure where the code comes from, and that guy is Adam. I talked about those headers with a Debian packager some hours ago during an important Linux meeting in Paris. It seems those headers aren't really necessary. You can get an application to be accepted without those headers, even if it is strongly advised. - Cinelerra depends of packages which are in the officials reps, but those packages are sometimes modified, to get ride of patented stuff. Would Cinelerra work with such packages? - Debian RFP (request to package) and ITP (intend to package) have already been made in the past. Look at #78209 (RFP), #156614 (RFP), #239570 (RFP) and #331072 (ITP). - Legal advice can be obtain on the Debian-legal mailing-list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal - Each Debian package must be accompanied by a "copyright" file, installed in /usr/share/doc/. Each contributor should be given proper credit and copyright notice in that file. - The way copyrights are tracked down in Cinelerra-CV could be improved. Fortunately, thanks to the revision system we used, we are able to give contributors proper credits in the future if this is needed. - The licence problem has been debated *OVER AND OVER* on this mailing-list and on the IRC (1 time per month approximately). Each time, the same questions and suggestions are made. I suggest creating a new page in the wiki about the licence issue, where all the information would be centralized. Nicolas Maufrais. -- ~~ ~ BOYCOTT SUSE & NOVELL (C)(TM)(R) MICRO$OFT ~ ~~ ~I DO LIKE AND SUPPORT GPL VERSION 3 ~ ~~ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Johannes Sixt wrote: > On Tuesday 30 January 2007 23:40, muzzol wrote: > >> hi again, >> >> im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in >> fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as >> applying a simple patch. >> >> this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions >> here. >> > Your religion (Debina+Ubuntu+FSF) does not conflict with mine (briefly > outlined above). Therefore, I see no reason to reject patches if you send > them in. > > -- Hannes > This is all we're looking for. That the patch be accepted if we do it. -Cory ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Tuesday 30 January 2007 23:40, muzzol wrote: > hi again, > > im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in > fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as > applying a simple patch. > > this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions > here. 1. If the license text is in the root directory of the source code, it is made absolutely clear how the source code thereunder is licensed. It is in no way necessary to write a license preamble in each and every file. 2. I take licenses series. But that does not mean that I'm going to look whether any code in the cinelerra directory is violating the license. Almost all of the code was written by someone else. 3. I will not waste my time writing preambles into files. 4. Your religion (Debina+Ubuntu+FSF) does not conflict with mine (briefly outlined above). Therefore, I see no reason to reject patches if you send them in. -- Hannes ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Holger Levsen wrote: > BTW, last time I looked there were also quite some libaries copied into the > cinelerra sourcetree - this is bad from a maintainance point of view Here we go again. -- Matthew Skala [EMAIL PROTECTED]Embrace and defend. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Hi, On Wednesday 31 January 2007 10:02, muzzol wrote: > 2007/1/31, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > i believe there was talk about _exactly_ this few months ago on this > > list. Yes :) I'm happily read this thread and will happily maintain cinelerra in debian once the licence issues are resolved. BTW, last time I looked there were also quite some libaries copied into the cinelerra sourcetree - this is bad from a maintainance point of view (security patches need to be applied many times) but this also effects the debian/copyright file: the author of every software included and its licence need to be mentioned there. > > It was resolved by someone contacting Adam and getting clearance for the > > code he wrote. Now someone must check if there are any other files in > > the tree and clear up all of the cases. > > yes. there's no grey areas here. we have the confirmation. Aeh, did Adam really write _all_ the code (from those files without GPL statements)? He only gave clarification for the code he wrote. This is still serious progress (cheers!) but - as I understand it - we are not there yet. regards, Holger pgpJc0M3Cfgao.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
2007/1/31, Andraž Tori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: i believe there was talk about _exactly_ this few months ago on this list. It was resolved by someone contacting Adam and getting clearance for the code he wrote. Now someone must check if there are any other files in the tree and clear up all of the cases. yes. there's no grey areas here. we have the confirmation. So ... you only need time. yes, and this is the reason im asking for your help. i think we're making difficult a very simple thing. we just need to add few lines to some .c files. as nick burns says, "is that so hard?" :) i dont really like to push people but it would be great to see cinelerra on next ubuntu release. -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Kevin Brosius schreef: Well, I certainly don't speak for all the developers... But those who use Ubuntu and Debian are the ones concerned. I'm sad to see they have not stepped up and provided a patch. You suggested that having this done would increase the number of developers for Cinelerra. I find this hard to believe, if there aren't any developers on those distros already willing to work on integration. Sorry if this sounds unreasonable, but we all have things we would like to see done. Patching dozens of files is not one I personally plan on tackling. I don't think applying the headers will immediately increase the number of developers, but it sure will increase the number of people using Cinelerra. And the more people using the software, the bigger the chance is that some devs will step up and will help coding. Remember that Ubuntu has a _lot_ of potential users for Cinelerra. Regards, Jeroen van de Nieuwenhof ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
mozzol contacted Adam and got permission. The issue is the interpretation of the link: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html >From the link: "This statement should go near the beginning of every source file, close to the copyright notices." So does this mean per file or in the root dir? The consensus within Debian seems to be every file. In the end Ill contact the FSF for clarification. Andraž Tori wrote: > i believe there was talk about _exactly_ this few months ago on this > list. > > It was resolved by someone contacting Adam and getting clearance for the > code he wrote. Now someone must check if there are any other files in > the tree and clear up all of the cases. > > So ... you only need time. > > I've wrote a few files in CVS version... and as far as i am concerned > they can be licenced under GPL 2 or any later revision. > > bye > andraz > > On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 23:40 +0100, muzzol wrote: > >> hi again, >> >> im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in >> fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as >> applying a simple patch. >> >> this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions >> here. >> >> >> >>> True. So why hasnt this been done already? >>> >>> Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but >>> insufficient for Debian packaging rules. >>> >>> So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file >>> and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that >>> the files are cool and add the header to the files. >>> >>> We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to >>> get this done. ie: a patch or something. >>> >>> Cory >>> >>> >> > > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Kevin Brosius wrote: > Well, I certainly don't speak for all the developers... But those who > use Ubuntu and Debian are the ones concerned. I'm sad to see they have > not stepped up and provided a patch. > _If_ the way the current license is structured is wrong, it concerns everyone. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html >From the link: "This statement should go near the beginning of every source file, close to the copyright notices." So does this mean per file or in the root dir? The consensus within Debian seems to be every file. Also if you read the other posts, muzzol has stepped up and offered to do the patch if needed. > You suggested that having this done would increase the number of > developers for Cinelerra. I find this hard to believe, if there aren't > any developers on those distros already willing to work on integration. > "Developers" was probably the wrong word. Defiantly more users and a larger spotlight on the project. > Sorry if this sounds unreasonable, but we all have things we would like > to see done. Patching dozens of files is not one I personally plan on > tackling. > Thats too bad. We could use the help. :) It actually looks to be around 2000 files from what Im told. > Consider this... It would be easier for CinelerraCV if the GPL license > was applied first to Heroine's tree. To that end, someone would need to > generate a patch against Heroine's sources and submit it upstream. Then > it could be merged at our next release from upstream (2.2? 3.0?) > > Who using Debian or Ubuntu would like to step up and tackle that? > > Kevin > > (I'm also sad you have not learned how to bottom post. :D ) > Like I said, muzzol has stepped up. We just need to hear from devs. So if we could get a chat going to see what can be done to better things on all sides this would be awesome. > > On 2007-01-30 22:40, muzzol wrote: > >> hi again, >> >> im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in >> fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as >> applying a simple patch. >> >> this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions >> here. >> >> >> >>> True. So why hasnt this been done already? >>> >>> Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but >>> insufficient for Debian packaging rules. >>> >>> So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file >>> and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that >>> the files are cool and add the header to the files. >>> >>> We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to >>> get this done. ie: a patch or something. >>> >>> Cory >>> >>> > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
i believe there was talk about _exactly_ this few months ago on this list. It was resolved by someone contacting Adam and getting clearance for the code he wrote. Now someone must check if there are any other files in the tree and clear up all of the cases. So ... you only need time. I've wrote a few files in CVS version... and as far as i am concerned they can be licenced under GPL 2 or any later revision. bye andraz On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 23:40 +0100, muzzol wrote: > hi again, > > im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in > fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as > applying a simple patch. > > this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions > here. > > > > True. So why hasnt this been done already? > > > > Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but > > insufficient for Debian packaging rules. > > > > So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file > > and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that > > the files are cool and add the header to the files. > > > > We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to > > get this done. ie: a patch or something. > > > > Cory > > > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, muzzol wrote: > im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in > fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as If you're the copyright holder, then your actions can't be GPL violations; you don't need a license for your own work. Just because you intend to put something under the GPL doesn't mean you're REQUIRED to give notice of that intent in a particular form. Furthermore, there's nothing in the GPL saying that it's only valid if mentioned in every source file, and it would make no sense for that to be a requirement for GPL validity because in many cases it would be impossible to comply with. This is, at most, a violation of Ubuntu's policy. However, it's an easily resolved one - let's just put the notice in every source file. Does Ubuntu have a precise definition of exactly what notice they want in every source file? I'm put off if they claim "we require what the GPL requires" because that's nonsense - the GPL doesn't and can't require any such thing - but at the same time, it's more important to satisfy Ubuntu on this point than to convince them. -- Matthew Skala [EMAIL PROTECTED]Embrace and defend. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Well, I certainly don't speak for all the developers... But those who use Ubuntu and Debian are the ones concerned. I'm sad to see they have not stepped up and provided a patch. You suggested that having this done would increase the number of developers for Cinelerra. I find this hard to believe, if there aren't any developers on those distros already willing to work on integration. Sorry if this sounds unreasonable, but we all have things we would like to see done. Patching dozens of files is not one I personally plan on tackling. Consider this... It would be easier for CinelerraCV if the GPL license was applied first to Heroine's tree. To that end, someone would need to generate a patch against Heroine's sources and submit it upstream. Then it could be merged at our next release from upstream (2.2? 3.0?) Who using Debian or Ubuntu would like to step up and tackle that? Kevin (I'm also sad you have not learned how to bottom post. :D ) On 2007-01-30 22:40, muzzol wrote: > hi again, > > im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in > fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as > applying a simple patch. > > this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions > here. > > > > True. So why hasnt this been done already? > > > > Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but > > insufficient for Debian packaging rules. > > > > So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file > > and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that > > the files are cool and add the header to the files. > > > > We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to > > get this done. ie: a patch or something. > > > > Cory > > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
hi again, im sad to see no developers are answering. this is really serious, in fact it could be a GPL license violation and is as simple to resolv as applying a simple patch. this is mainly focused to developers but i would like to hear oppinions here. True. So why hasnt this been done already? Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but insufficient for Debian packaging rules. So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that the files are cool and add the header to the files. We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to get this done. ie: a patch or something. Cory -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote: > Le 29.01.2007 17:03:27, muzzol a écrit : >> hi! >> >> cinelerra is making its path to ubuntu. >> >> i was talking with some ubuntu developers and for now there's only >> one issue with cinelerra: gpl headers. fsf says that every file >> distributed as GPL has to have the gpl header at the beggining. this >> is not true in case of cinelerra and if we dont provide a tarball >> with this problem corrected ubuntu will not allow cinelerra to go >> into their repos. >> >> so im asking to any of the devs that have access to cvs if they can >> do de job. is just a simple script that cats two files. im pretty >> sure any of you can do it, but if you want i can provide you a script >> that do the job. >> >> this is mandatory if we want ubuntu to include cinelerra in their >> repos, and i think this will boost cinelerra development by a 1000%. >> >> if you know any other issue you think can affect to licensing aspects >> of cinelerra and its distribution, please let me know. >> >> regards. > > Probalbly licences are not only a matter of pasting a text in a file. > Is it *sure* *every* file and part of code in cinelerra tree is > licenced under GPL and cannot be opposed other licence or patents? > > Jean-Luc True. So why hasnt this been done already? Ive been told the license file in the root dir is correct but insufficient for Debian packaging rules. So if that license file is correct, and the devs are *sure* *every* file and part of code is GPL we should be able to make the assumption that the files are cool and add the header to the files. We have permission to do this but it would be better to work upstream to get this done. ie: a patch or something. Cory ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Le 29.01.2007 17:03:27, muzzol a écrit : hi! cinelerra is making its path to ubuntu. i was talking with some ubuntu developers and for now there's only one issue with cinelerra: gpl headers. fsf says that every file distributed as GPL has to have the gpl header at the beggining. this is not true in case of cinelerra and if we dont provide a tarball with this problem corrected ubuntu will not allow cinelerra to go into their repos. so im asking to any of the devs that have access to cvs if they can do de job. is just a simple script that cats two files. im pretty sure any of you can do it, but if you want i can provide you a script that do the job. this is mandatory if we want ubuntu to include cinelerra in their repos, and i think this will boost cinelerra development by a 1000%. if you know any other issue you think can affect to licensing aspects of cinelerra and its distribution, please let me know. regards. Probalbly licences are not only a matter of pasting a text in a file. Is it *sure* *every* file and part of code in cinelerra tree is licenced under GPL and cannot be opposed other licence or patents? Jean-Luc pgprwfrpE2pYR.pgp Description: PGP signature
[CinCVS] gpl headers
hi! cinelerra is making its path to ubuntu. i was talking with some ubuntu developers and for now there's only one issue with cinelerra: gpl headers. fsf says that every file distributed as GPL has to have the gpl header at the beggining. this is not true in case of cinelerra and if we dont provide a tarball with this problem corrected ubuntu will not allow cinelerra to go into their repos. so im asking to any of the devs that have access to cvs if they can do de job. is just a simple script that cats two files. im pretty sure any of you can do it, but if you want i can provide you a script that do the job. this is mandatory if we want ubuntu to include cinelerra in their repos, and i think this will boost cinelerra development by a 1000%. if you know any other issue you think can affect to licensing aspects of cinelerra and its distribution, please let me know. regards. -- ^ ^ O O (_ _) muzzol(a)gmail.com jabber id: muzzol(a)jabber.dk No atribueixis qualitats humanes als ordinadors. No els hi agrada. "El gobierno español sólo habla con terroristas, homosexuales y catalanes, a ver cuando se decide a hablar con gente normal" Jiménez Losantos bomb terrorism bush aznar teletubbies ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
