Re: deimos libx11 license
On 8/12/2013 10:41 PM, luminousone wrote: The original license of Xlib I am pretty sure is the x11 license, any idea who the maintainer of the libx11 deimos project is, The contributors to each commit are listed on github - you should be able to contact them. The Deimos project files should be nothing more than the declarations necessary to connect D code to the library. I think it's been settled that a list of declarations is not copyrightable, as I recall Linux settled that. Where you start getting into trouble is if you copy the comments and creative elements.
Re: deimos libx11 license
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
Re: deimos libx11 license
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!
