Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-12 Thread Micha Nelissen

Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
released under the LGPL. However the relevant LGPL provisions do not 
address all possible ways in which code released under the MPL and code 
released under the LGPL could be combined to form a larger work. In 
particular, when linking Mozilla source files directly into a library 
released under the LGPL, e.g., to extend the functionality of that 


This is why we have the exception.

Micha
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-12 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:04:00 +0300, Micha Nelissen [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:



Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
released under the LGPL. However the relevant LGPL provisions do not  
address all possible ways in which code released under the MPL and code  
released under the LGPL could be combined to form a larger work. In  
particular, when linking Mozilla source files directly into a library  
released under the LGPL, e.g., to extend the functionality of that


This is why we have the exception.



Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.


--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-12 Thread Micha Nelissen

Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
library released under the LGPL, e.g., to extend the functionality of 
that


This is why we have the exception.


Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.


For example, look at the RTL license:

http://www.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/trunk/rtl/COPYING.FPC?rev=1view=markup

It specifies the exception. Lazarus' LCL has the same exception in 
COPYING.modifiedLGPL IIRC.


Micha
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-12 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:42:36 +0300, Micha Nelissen [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:



Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
library released under the LGPL, e.g., to extend the functionality of  
that


This is why we have the exception.

 Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.


For example, look at the RTL license:

http://www.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/trunk/rtl/COPYING.FPC?rev=1view=markup

It specifies the exception. Lazarus' LCL has the same exception in  
COPYING.modifiedLGPL IIRC.




Sorry, but we still don't understand each other. I was talking not about  
first part of sentence (you mark it red), but about ending:


 the effect of the LGPL terms, and any potential license incompatibilities  
that might arise, appear to be similar to those associated with the GPL.)



And we were talking about linking MPL code to fpc, but not about fpc to  
some MPL.

Daniël have written to Dominique, so we are waiting the answer.


--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-11 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 23:12:32 +0300, Jonas Maebe  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:





Are the licensing issues sorted out for it? If not, there may be a  
problem since standard MPL is incompatible with GPL (so people can't  
release GPL programs using those bindings). I don't know about the LGPL  
(and how our static linking exception affects this).




As far as I know if somebody uses  MPL the product based on  MPL must be  
only  MPL.


MPL is incompatible with  LGPL too.

http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html

There is a way to use a triple license. But as I understood we need to  
make all  FPC code licenced as  MPL/LGPL because one module uses  MPL  
code. It is not the way.

So, if we want to have  sdlgraph there are 3 ways:
- rewrite needed  SDL headers
- write  SDL initialization and few base function for  SDL in C and then  
make headers for pascal
- speak with JEDI-SDL developer. But I don't know if he  relized it under   
MPL has he right to give such permission




--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-11 Thread Marco van de Voort
  Are the licensing issues sorted out for it? If not, there may be a  
  problem since standard MPL is incompatible with GPL (so people can't  
  release GPL programs using those bindings). I don't know about the LGPL  
  (and how our static linking exception affects this).
 
 
 As far as I know if somebody uses  MPL the product based on  MPL must be  
 only  MPL.
 
 MPL is incompatible with  LGPL too.
 
 http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html

Where exactly? I see perceived incompability in the header, but afaik FSF
only names GPL.
 
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-11 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:11:06 +0300, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:



 Are the licensing issues sorted out for it? If not, there may be a
 problem since standard MPL is incompatible with GPL (so people can't
 release GPL programs using those bindings). I don't know about the  
LGPL

 (and how our static linking exception affects this).


As far as I know if somebody uses  MPL the product based on  MPL must be
only  MPL.

MPL is incompatible with  LGPL too.

http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html


Where exactly? I see perceived incompability in the header, but afaik  
FSF

only names GPL.


http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html#why-relicensing

===
(The LGPL allows code released under LGPL terms to be combined in certain  
specified ways with code released under non-LGPL terms, as for example  
when releasing an application using a library consisting of code released  
under the LGPL. However the relevant LGPL provisions do not address all  
possible ways in which code released under the MPL and code released under  
the LGPL could be combined to form a larger work. In particular, when  
linking Mozilla source files directly into a library released under the  
LGPL, e.g., to extend the functionality of that library, the effect of the  
LGPL terms, and any potential license incompatibilities that might arise,  
appear to be similar to those associated with the GPL.)

===


--
Best regards
E.I.___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-10 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:09:32 +0300, Jonas Maebe  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




Daniel was talking about staticallu linking the interface, not the  
libraries themselves. Since we do not distribute the libraries, what  
license they are distributed under is irrelevant. The interface can be  
used to both link the dynamic and static library versions of SDL.




OK, the conclusion is to implement  sdlgraph in pascal on top of JEDI-SDL.  
So, I will work with it. I will finish my study activities (I was ill 2  
weeks so this week (after Sunday) I will clear my debts) and then will  
implement it.

Daniël was talking about 2.2  FPC release, what is date in team's plans?


--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-10 Thread Aleš Katona

 
 OK, the conclusion is to implement  sdlgraph in pascal on top of JEDI-SDL.  
 So, I will work with it. I will finish my study activities (I was ill 2  
 weeks so this week (after Sunday) I will clear my debts) and then will  
 implement it.
 Daniël was talking about 2.2  FPC release, what is date in team's plans?
 
 
Just so you know, I just added modified SDL units from JEDI-SDL into
packages/extra but only to trunk (2.3.1). I think it's best you use
those and not copy your own, but we might need to merge into 2.2 later
then (there's a freeze in effect now I think?)

Ales

___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-10 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:40:31 +0300, Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Just so you know, I just added modified SDL units from JEDI-SDL into
packages/extra but only to trunk (2.3.1). I think it's best you use
those and not copy your own, but we might need to merge into 2.2 later
then (there's a freeze in effect now I think?)



Do you mean http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk/packages/extra/sdl/ ?
Yes, I will use this, as team wish.



--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-10 Thread Jonas Maebe


On 10 Mar 2007, at 11:40, Aleš Katona wrote:


Just so you know, I just added modified SDL units from JEDI-SDL into
packages/extra but only to trunk (2.3.1). I think it's best you use
those and not copy your own, but we might need to merge into 2.2 later
then (there's a freeze in effect now I think?)


Are the licensing issues sorted out for it? If not, there may be a  
problem since standard MPL is incompatible with GPL (so people can't  
release GPL programs using those bindings). I don't know about the  
LGPL (and how our static linking exception affects this).



Jonas___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Daniël Mantione


Op Fri, 9 Mar 2007, schreef Evgeniy Ivanov:

 Hello!
 
 I tried to use freepascal' graph module based on svgalib but from my point of
 view it's not comfortable: I need root prevelege or to remember what to do
 with *ids (uid and so on). Also I have a problems with konsole after starting
 programm with graph module: there is an error with input and I get much
 garbage inside it.
 I realize a test module with a few graph functions (for my needs) via SDLlib.
 I wrote it on C, but some code may be written on pascal. It's not bad and
 fully compotable with traditional graph module code. I have some problems, but
 I will solve them (SDL don't want to return 'keydowns'). If you like it I may
 realize a full and normal graph module.
 Test programm need to be started in the terminal (console). You need to push
 the key only after setting up the terminal window active. I start in in
 konsole. If you start it from GUI in will run and then the window will close
 its self. In the tar there is linux binary.
 
 Here the test ptogramm and simple graph module:
 http://itmo.vingrad.ru/testGraph.tar.bz2

It is in the planning to rewrite Graph on top of PTCPas. I hope to do this 
before 2.2 it released. In the meantime ggigraph might suit your needs.

Implementing graph on top of SDL might also be an idea, but it should then 
be built on top of JEDI-SDL, and reuse the existing graph 
code. Implementing graph in C seems like a bad idea to me.

Daniël Mantione___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Florian Klaempfl
Daniël Mantione schrieb:
 It is in the planning to rewrite Graph on top of PTCPas. I hope to do this 
 before 2.2 it released. In the meantime ggigraph might suit your needs.

Then you've to hurry ;)
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Tomas Hajny
Daniël Mantione wrote:
 Op Fri, 9 Mar 2007, schreef Evgeniy Ivanov:


Hi Evgeniy,

 I tried to use freepascal' graph module based on svgalib but from my
 point of
 view it's not comfortable: I need root prevelege or to remember what to
 do
 with *ids (uid and so on). Also I have a problems with konsole after
 starting
 programm with graph module: there is an error with input and I get much
 garbage inside it.
 I realize a test module with a few graph functions (for my needs) via
 SDLlib.
 I wrote it on C, but some code may be written on pascal. It's not bad
 and
 fully compotable with traditional graph module code. I have some
 problems, but
 I will solve them (SDL don't want to return 'keydowns'). If you like it
 I may
 realize a full and normal graph module.
 Test programm need to be started in the terminal (console). You need to
 push
 the key only after setting up the terminal window active. I start in in
 konsole. If you start it from GUI in will run and then the window will
 close
 its self. In the tar there is linux binary.

 Here the test ptogramm and simple graph module:
 http://itmo.vingrad.ru/testGraph.tar.bz2

 It is in the planning to rewrite Graph on top of PTCPas. I hope to do this
 before 2.2 it released. In the meantime ggigraph might suit your needs.

 Implementing graph on top of SDL might also be an idea, but it should then
 be built on top of JEDI-SDL, and reuse the existing graph
 code. Implementing graph in C seems like a bad idea to me.

I'd say that having Graph built on top of SDL would be quite useful. I
agree  with Daniel that implementation in Pascal would be much better
choice - among others, one could use it on various platforms without
having to compile C libraries on those platforms (SDL is available on
quite a few of them). I believe that Daniel intended to rewrite Graph to
use a driver system (similarly to what we use for threading,
keyboard/video/mouse units, heap management etc.), which would allow
people to use the same Graph functionalities supported by different
back-ends and choose either at compile time or possibly even at run time
which back-end should be used (as an example, svgalib could be used as
backup option for systems not running X11, etc.).

I personally wouldn't necessarily wait for PTCPas based implementation -
if Daniel wants to use the driver system, it should be enough to agree on
the driver interface, anything else can be done completely independently.

If you implement Graph as a completely independent implementation, you
could add it to contributed units (see our WWW pages), so anybody else can
use it.

If you do it using the driver system and want to contribute this work to
FPC, I can imagine it could even become part of our SVN repository and
future official FPC releases under some conditions (however, this last
sentence is my personal view, not necessarily shared by the whole FPC core
team).

Tomas

___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 15:46:34 +0300, Tomas Hajny [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:


Hi Tomas,



Hi Evgeniy,


I'd say that having Graph built on top of SDL would be quite useful. I
agree  with Daniel that implementation in Pascal would be much better
choice - among others, one could use it on various platforms without
having to compile C libraries on those platforms (SDL is available on
quite a few of them). I believe that Daniel intended to rewrite Graph to
use a driver system (similarly to what we use for threading,
keyboard/video/mouse units, heap management etc.), which would allow
people to use the same Graph functionalities supported by different
back-ends and choose either at compile time or possibly even at run time
which back-end should be used (as an example, svgalib could be used as
backup option for systems not running X11, etc.).

I personally wouldn't necessarily wait for PTCPas based implementation -
if Daniel wants to use the driver system, it should be enough to agree on
the driver interface, anything else can be done completely independently.


As far as I've understood Daniel is working only on driver system, isn't  
it? He doesn't touch such things like line and circle for example (It  
should be based on PutPixel as I thing) but he is implementing only the  
things that using back-end libs (like PTCPas), in my example such thing is  
PutPixel. Am I right?



If you implement Graph as a completely independent implementation, you
could add it to contributed units (see our WWW pages), so anybody else  
can

use it.

If you do it using the driver system and want to contribute this work to
FPC, I can imagine it could even become part of our SVN repository and
future official FPC releases under some conditions (however, this last
sentence is my personal view, not necessarily shared by the whole FPC  
core

team).
Tomas



It would be great for me to realize a small small part of  FPC. And I find  
that it is much more useful to build a piece for something than create own  
little project.
I will do it using driver system with pleasure, but you've written that it  
is only your own opinion.

And there are several questions about libraries and programme languages.

I agree that the most part must be in pascal, but I think that such things  
like  SDL initialization, loading images need to be implemented in C (if  
use native  SDL headers). From my point of view usage of C parts is less  
dangerous then usage converters and other wrappers stuff. I have no  
experience with JEDI_SDL, but the last release was 2 years ago... And it's  
only the headers, so it uses native  SDL libraries.

I'm just beginner in software development so, please, be patient.




--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Jonas Maebe


On 9 mrt 2007, at 15:59, Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:

I personally wouldn't necessarily wait for PTCPas based  
implementation -
if Daniel wants to use the driver system, it should be enough to  
agree on
the driver interface, anything else can be done completely  
independently.


As far as I've understood Daniel is working only on driver system,  
isn't it? He doesn't touch such things like line and circle for  
example (It should be based on PutPixel as I thing) but he is  
implementing only the things that using back-end libs (like  
PTCPas), in my example such thing is PutPixel. Am I right?


The graph unit is pretty generic in this respect. You indeed only  
need to implement putpixel, getpixel, graphics mode detection,  
setting a graphic mode, setting and getting colour palette entries  
for indexed modes, and closing down the graphic system again. But  
it's perfectly possible to also intercept line, elipse, rectangle etc  
and to implement them directly in the driver.


I will do it using driver system with pleasure, but you've written  
that it is only your own opinion.


It's the way the whole graphics unit is designed to work. Note that  
driver is just used in the figurative sense here. In practice, you  
simply write your code and set some procedure variables inside the  
graph unit so it calls your code.


I agree that the most part must be in pascal, but I think that such  
things like  SDL initialization, loading images need to be  
implemented in C (if use native  SDL headers). From my point of  
view usage of C parts is less dangerous then usage converters and  
other wrappers stuff.


If you write your code in C, then you need to write Pascal headers  
for your code. In the end, you will always have to convert some headers.


I have no experience with JEDI_SDL, but the last release was 2  
years ago... And it's only the headers, so it uses native  SDL  
libraries.


That's true, and it's the case for most libraries out there.  
Converting all libraries from C to Pascal rather than the headers  
would be a huge and never-ending duplication of effort. There's  
nothing wrong with using Pascal interfaces for libraries which are  
written in another language.



Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:08:35 +0300, Jonas Maebe  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:





The graph unit is pretty generic in this respect. You indeed only need  
to implement putpixel, getpixel, graphics mode detection, setting a  
graphic mode, setting and getting colour palette entries for indexed  
modes, and closing down the graphic system again. But it's perfectly  
possible to also intercept line, elipse, rectangle etc and to implement  
them directly in the driver.


So, I may implement only putpixel and etc, but then if I wish I may  
implement line and othe stuff inside my part of code (or somewhere)?





It's the way the whole graphics unit is designed to work. Note that  
driver is just used in the figurative sense here. In practice, you  
simply write your code and set some procedure variables inside the graph  
unit so it calls your code.


So will be there different ways of using different back-ends directly from  
graph unit like to have some variables like sdlgraph=1?






If you write your code in C, then you need to write Pascal headers for  
your code. In the end, you will always have to convert some headers.



That's true, and it's the case for most libraries out there. Converting  
all libraries from C to Pascal rather than the headers would be a huge  
and never-ending duplication of effort. There's nothing wrong with using  
Pascal interfaces for libraries which are written in another language.




So if I will implement it in C with pascal headers it have a chance to be  
a part of freepascal?




--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Marco van de Voort
  That's true, and it's the case for most libraries out there. Converting  
  all libraries from C to Pascal rather than the headers would be a huge  
  and never-ending duplication of effort. There's nothing wrong with using  
  Pascal interfaces for libraries which are written in another language.
 
 
 So if I will implement it in C with pascal headers it have a chance to be  
 a part of freepascal?

No, since it would increase the requirements of FPC with a C compiler, for
something that could also be done in Pascal.

Jonas meant that it's no problem to use C libs for SDL using the Pascal headers
to interface to Pascal main code.

___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Jonas Maebe


On 9 mrt 2007, at 16:26, Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:

On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:08:35 +0300, Jonas Maebe  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


The graph unit is pretty generic in this respect. You indeed only  
need to implement putpixel, getpixel, graphics mode detection,  
setting a graphic mode, setting and getting colour palette entries  
for indexed modes, and closing down the graphic system again. But  
it's perfectly possible to also intercept line, elipse, rectangle  
etc and to implement them directly in the driver.


So, I may implement only putpixel and etc, but then if I wish I may  
implement line and othe stuff inside my part of code (or somewhere)?


Yes, inside your code.

It's the way the whole graphics unit is designed to work. Note  
that driver is just used in the figurative sense here. In  
practice, you simply write your code and set some procedure  
variables inside the graph unit so it calls your code.


So will be there different ways of using different back-ends  
directly from graph unit like to have some variables like sdlgraph=1?


No, this is done by creating differently named graph units. All  
common graph unit code is in some include files, and to create a new  
graph unit for a different platform/library, you create a new unit  
with code needed for this platform library, and which includes all  
those generic include files.


See e.g. the graph.pp and ggigraph.pp files at
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk/packages/base/graph/unix/

The include files are in
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk/packages/base/graph/inc/

That's true, and it's the case for most libraries out there.  
Converting all libraries from C to Pascal rather than the headers  
would be a huge and never-ending duplication of effort. There's  
nothing wrong with using Pascal interfaces for libraries which are  
written in another language.


So if I will implement it in C with pascal headers it have a chance  
to be a part of freepascal?


Very little. We do this to reuse work done and maintained by others,  
not for new code which we support and maintain (since we ourselves  
are Pascal programmers, not C programmers).



Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:36:40 +0300, Jonas Maebe  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




See e.g. the graph.pp and ggigraph.pp files at
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk/packages/base/graph/unix/

The include files are in
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk/packages/base/graph/inc/


Thanks, I wanted to ask about it but you prevented my question.




Very little. We do this to reuse work done and maintained by others, not  
for new code which we support and maintain (since we ourselves are  
Pascal programmers, not C programmers).





I meant that I want to implement dangerous parts in C (driver core) and  
other things in pascal. But other developers are right that it is bad idea  
to write on C for pascal project.



On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:39:10 +0300, Daniël Mantione  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:





Well, Graph maintenance is more than welcome.


I will try to work in this way. It is interesting.




Many people @ Pascal Game Development. Domique Louis (Savage) is also
still maintaining it. Writing all the imports yourself seems a bit like
reinventing the wheel.



Reinventing the wheel is to write all  SDL imports, for graph I need only  
few.


So you think that it is not bad to use JEDI  SDL instead writing some  
initialization code on C and make pascal headers for it? I haven't used  
JEDI  SDL before but it is beta. I need your advise.





--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Tomas Hajny
Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
 On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:36:40 +0300, Jonas Maebe
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:39:10 +0300, DaniĂŤl Mantione
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 .
 .
 Many people @ Pascal Game Development. Domique Louis (Savage) is also
 still maintaining it. Writing all the imports yourself seems a bit like
 reinventing the wheel.

 Reinventing the wheel is to write all  SDL imports, for graph I need only
 few.

 So you think that it is not bad to use JEDI  SDL instead writing some
 initialization code on C and make pascal headers for it? I haven't used
 JEDI  SDL before but it is beta. I need your advise.

I don't know what heder conversions are available for SDL. However, I
believe there are basically two options:

1) Have full SDL headers added as another package in repository (either
existing like JEDI SDL or possibly a new one, although that would probably
make little sense). I don't know what the size and complexity of these
headers is and whether there might be somebody who could maintain such a
package in our repository.

2) Include highly limited set of imports necessary for SDL purposes
directly in the new sdlgraph (or whatever is the name). This might make
sense if we don't have somebody who'd maintain the full headers, whereas
maintaining just a highly limited set needed for sdlgraph purposes might
be still acceptable (possibly just copied from the existing headers if the
licence for those headers allows it).

Tomas

___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Daniël Mantione


Op Fri, 9 Mar 2007, schreef Tomas Hajny:

 Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
  On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:36:40 +0300, Jonas Maebe
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 18:39:10 +0300, Dani??l Mantione
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  .
  .
  Many people @ Pascal Game Development. Domique Louis (Savage) is also
  still maintaining it. Writing all the imports yourself seems a bit like
  reinventing the wheel.
 
  Reinventing the wheel is to write all  SDL imports, for graph I need only
  few.
 
  So you think that it is not bad to use JEDI  SDL instead writing some
  initialization code on C and make pascal headers for it? I haven't used
  JEDI  SDL before but it is beta. I need your advise.
 
 I don't know what heder conversions are available for SDL. However, I
 believe there are basically two options:
 
 1) Have full SDL headers added as another package in repository (either
 existing like JEDI SDL or possibly a new one, although that would probably
 make little sense). I don't know what the size and complexity of these
 headers is and whether there might be somebody who could maintain such a
 package in our repository.

JEDI-SDL is rather large. It contains import libraries for many SDL 
sattelite libraries, many examples and documentation. It is under somewhat 
active development by Dominique Louis.

 2) Include highly limited set of imports necessary for SDL purposes
 directly in the new sdlgraph (or whatever is the name).

We could limit ourselves to sdl.pas. This is the main library. All 
graphics formats stuff, 3D stuff etc. is of less importance to graph.

 This might make
 sense if we don't have somebody who'd maintain the full headers, whereas
 maintaining just a highly limited set needed for sdlgraph purposes might
 be still acceptable (possibly just copied from the existing headers if the
 licence for those headers allows it).

SDL is LGPL, so is JEDI-SDL. We would need ask Dominique for permission of 
the FPC static linking exception to just JEDI-SDL (we do not distribute 
SDL itself). I don't think this will be a problem.

Daniël___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Evgeniy Ivanov
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:07:55 +0300, Daniël Mantione  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:




This might make
sense if we don't have somebody who'd maintain the full headers, whereas
maintaining just a highly limited set needed for sdlgraph purposes might
be still acceptable (possibly just copied from the existing headers if  
the

licence for those headers allows it).


SDL is LGPL, so is JEDI-SDL. We would need ask Dominique for permission  
of

the FPC static linking exception to just JEDI-SDL (we do not distribute
SDL itself). I don't think this will be a problem.



Sorry, but you are wrong. JEDI-SDL is Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL  
1.1). I don't know all refinements of licences, but JEDI-SDL is based on   
SDL libraries and they are LGPL version 2, so if we want to use JEDI-SDL  
headers they will bring us  MPL 1.1 and it's requirements. But linking  
with  SDL library will bring  LGPL 2. If you mean static linking (ld job  
and static libraries) then we need permissions not from Dominique but from  
Sam  Lantinga. As far as I know JEDI-SDL haven't its own libraries.




--
Best regards
E.I.
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel


Re: [fpc-devel] graph module

2007-03-09 Thread Jonas Maebe


On 9 mrt 2007, at 20:33, Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:

Sorry, but you are wrong. JEDI-SDL is Mozilla Public License 1.1  
(MPL 1.1). I don't know all refinements of licences, but JEDI-SDL  
is based on  SDL libraries and they are LGPL version 2, so if we  
want to use JEDI-SDL headers they will bring us  MPL 1.1 and it's  
requirements. But linking with  SDL library will bring  LGPL 2. If  
you mean static linking (ld job and static libraries) then we need  
permissions not from Dominique but from Sam  Lantinga. As far as I  
know JEDI-SDL haven't its own libraries.


Daniel was talking about staticallu linking the interface, not the  
libraries themselves. Since we do not distribute the libraries, what  
license they are distributed under is irrelevant. The interface can  
be used to both link the dynamic and static library versions of SDL.



Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel