Re: Licensing
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 05:38:26PM +0100, John Emmas via gtk-devel-list wrote: > On 28/05/2017 14:41, Sébastien Wilmet wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:02:21AM +0100, John Emmas via gtk-devel-list > > wrote: > > > the following 11 header files stipulate GPL:- > > > > > >gbase64.h > > >gbookmarkfile.h > > >gchecksum.h > > >ghmac.h > > >glib-private.h > > >glib-unix.h > > >gmain.h > > >gmain-internal.h > > >gmessages-private.h > > >goption.h > > >gpoll.h > > > > > > Just thought I'd flag it up in case it's unintentional, > > I've checked the 3 first files that you list, and they are correctly > > licensed under the LGPL (up until recently it was the "GNU Library > > General Public License", it's now the "GNU Lesser General Public > > License"). > > > > Please double check the list. > > I updated from git master just now and the above files are all okay now. > However, in the latest stable branch (glib-2-52 ?) they're still showing the > older licenses. gbase64.h on glib-2-52 has the LGPLv2+ license, there is nothing wrong with that. See: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html#LGPL -- Sébastien ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Licensing
On 28/05/2017 14:41, Sébastien Wilmet wrote: On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:02:21AM +0100, John Emmas via gtk-devel-list wrote: the following 11 header files stipulate GPL:- gbase64.h gbookmarkfile.h gchecksum.h ghmac.h glib-private.h glib-unix.h gmain.h gmain-internal.h gmessages-private.h goption.h gpoll.h Just thought I'd flag it up in case it's unintentional, I've checked the 3 first files that you list, and they are correctly licensed under the LGPL (up until recently it was the "GNU Library General Public License", it's now the "GNU Lesser General Public License"). Please double check the list. Hi Sebastien, I updated from git master just now and the above files are all okay now. However, in the latest stable branch (glib-2-52 ?) they're still showing the older licenses. John ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Licensing
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:02:21AM +0100, John Emmas via gtk-devel-list wrote: > Hi guys - whilst checking something else this morning I came across an > anomaly in the licensing mechanism for glib / gtk+ etc. > > The vast majority of the header files state that it's LGPL. But > occasionally there are GPL headers here and there. For example in glib-2, > the following 11 header files stipulate GPL:- > > gbase64.h > gbookmarkfile.h > gchecksum.h > ghmac.h > glib-private.h > glib-unix.h > gmain.h > gmain-internal.h > gmessages-private.h > goption.h > gpoll.h > > Just thought I'd flag it up in case it's unintentional, I've checked the 3 first files that you list, and they are correctly licensed under the LGPL (up until recently it was the "GNU Library General Public License", it's now the "GNU Lesser General Public License"). Please double check the list. -- Sébastien ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Licensing
Hi guys - whilst checking something else this morning I came across an anomaly in the licensing mechanism for glib / gtk+ etc. The vast majority of the header files state that it's LGPL. But occasionally there are GPL headers here and there. For example in glib-2, the following 11 header files stipulate GPL:- gbase64.h gbookmarkfile.h gchecksum.h ghmac.h glib-private.h glib-unix.h gmain.h gmain-internal.h gmessages-private.h goption.h gpoll.h Just thought I'd flag it up in case it's unintentional, John ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
Le lundi 23 avril 2012, à 02:04 +0900, Evgeniy Philippov a écrit : В Чтв, 19/04/2012 в 08:13 +0200, Vincent Untz пишет: Le mercredi 18 avril 2012, à 13:19 -0400, Colin Walters a écrit : On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 20:50 +0900, Evgeniy Philippov wrote: Evgeniy wrote: ... Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Jernej Simončič wrote: The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ... Okay. Is it possible to include my possible future UIA code into GTK+ codebase if I use the Windows SDK headers? (Provided that my code will be quality, of course.) That's a really good question, and all I can say here is it needs someone with actual legal expertise to answer. I'm not sure what the process might be for handling that in GNOME. Do we have contacts with the FSF who might be able to help? https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/legal-list (or ask the Foundation board to ask our lawyers) Cheers, Vincent Well. I guess I am unable to communicate with lawyera, and I do not know how to describe my questions to them, and what are the community laws in the legal-list etc. So I either ask people to help me do this questioning task, OR someone please do this task, OR I stop this accessibility implementation activity at all because legal communities are a taboo, a forbidden area and a roadblock for me. Why not just ask your initial question there? It's a standard mailing list, so don't be afraid of using it. There's no specific laws there. I would think you'd be in a good position to help the people on legal-list clarify the question if needed, so that they can answer. Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
В Пнд, 23/04/2012 в 09:37 +0200, Vincent Untz пишет: Why not just ask your initial question there? It's a standard mailing list, so don't be afraid of using it. There's no specific laws there. I would think you'd be in a good position to help the people on legal-list clarify the question if needed, so that they can answer. Vincent, Thank you for heads up! Now I will formulate my initial question and send a message there on a legal-list. Thank you, BR, Evgeniy. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
Dieter Verfaillie wrote: Another option might be to use the LoadLibrary() + GetProcAddress() technique to get at the functions you need, which is already being used with success in GLib and GTK+ [1]. Doing so makes it unnecessary to redistribute proprietary licensed header files with GTK+ sources. mvg, Dieter [1] For example in GLib master there's gio/win32/gwinhttpvfs.c and in GTK+ master there's gdk/win32/gdkdevicemanager-win32.c and gtk/gtkwin32theme.c Thank you, Dieter, I will also consult at legal-list about this technique. BR, Evgeniy. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
В Чтв, 19/04/2012 в 08:13 +0200, Vincent Untz пишет: Le mercredi 18 avril 2012, à 13:19 -0400, Colin Walters a écrit : On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 20:50 +0900, Evgeniy Philippov wrote: Evgeniy wrote: ... Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Jernej Simončič wrote: The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ... Okay. Is it possible to include my possible future UIA code into GTK+ codebase if I use the Windows SDK headers? (Provided that my code will be quality, of course.) That's a really good question, and all I can say here is it needs someone with actual legal expertise to answer. I'm not sure what the process might be for handling that in GNOME. Do we have contacts with the FSF who might be able to help? https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/legal-list (or ask the Foundation board to ask our lawyers) Cheers, Vincent Well. I guess I am unable to communicate with lawyera, and I do not know how to describe my questions to them, and what are the community laws in the legal-list etc. So I either ask people to help me do this questioning task, OR someone please do this task, OR I stop this accessibility implementation activity at all because legal communities are a taboo, a forbidden area and a roadblock for me. I am rather hopeless about existence of a possibility that someone will actually help to ask lawyers. Thank you, Evgeniy Philippov ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
Le mercredi 18 avril 2012, à 13:19 -0400, Colin Walters a écrit : On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 20:50 +0900, Evgeniy Philippov wrote: Evgeniy wrote: ... Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Jernej Simončič wrote: The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ... Okay. Is it possible to include my possible future UIA code into GTK+ codebase if I use the Windows SDK headers? (Provided that my code will be quality, of course.) That's a really good question, and all I can say here is it needs someone with actual legal expertise to answer. I'm not sure what the process might be for handling that in GNOME. Do we have contacts with the FSF who might be able to help? https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/legal-list (or ask the Foundation board to ask our lawyers) Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
On 04/17/2012 01:50 PM, Evgeniy Philippov wrote: (I didn't yet research where my possible future UIA code goes to: probably to ATK, but I didn't study yet.) Why on ATK? ATK is an accessibility abstraction like UIA. What do you want to add on ATK in relation to UIA? BR -- Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 20:50 +0900, Evgeniy Philippov wrote: Evgeniy wrote: ... Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Jernej Simončič wrote: The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ... Okay. Is it possible to include my possible future UIA code into GTK+ codebase if I use the Windows SDK headers? (Provided that my code will be quality, of course.) That's a really good question, and all I can say here is it needs someone with actual legal expertise to answer. I'm not sure what the process might be for handling that in GNOME. Do we have contacts with the FSF who might be able to help? ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
Hello everyone, I'd be happy to add support for Microsoft layers in GTK+, but there is a problem with Windows SDK's license. The uiautomation.h and other UI Automation (UIA) headers cannot probably be distributed with GTK+. These headers are part of Windows SDK. Windows SDK for Windows 7 and .NET EULA says at section 2.a.iii: Distribution Restrictions. You may not ... modify or distribute the source code of any Distributable Code so that any part of it becomes subject to an Excluded License. An Excluded License is one that requires, as a condition of use, modification or distribution, that * the code be disclosed or distributed in source code form; or * others have the right to modify it. What should I do? Is it possible to extend GTK+ so that users (who build from source with UI Automation support enabled) will have to download Windows SDK to build from source with UI Automation support enabled? I.e. I propose this algorithm: 1) If you don't need UIA, you build without Windows SDK. 2) If you need UIA, you fetch Windows SDK and you're happy. Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Best regards, Evgeniy ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:17:41 +0900, Евгений Филиппов wrote: Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ,- | |This software is licensed under the GNU General Public License, |version 2 (GPLv2) (see COPYING for details), subject to the following |clarification. | |With respect to binaries built using the Microsoft(R) Windows Driver |Kit (WDK), GPLv2 does not extend to any code contained in or derived |from the WDK (WDK Code). As to WDK Code, by using or distributing |such binaries you agree to be bound by the Microsoft Software License |Terms for the WDK. All WDK Code is considered by the GPLv2 licensors |to qualify for the special exception stated in section 3 of GPLv2 |(commonly known as the system library exception). | `- -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Accessibility in GTK+ under Windows - licensing question
Evgeniy wrote: ... Is this possible? My concern is this WSDK EULA. Jernej Simončič wrote: The VirtIO drivers for Qemu-KVM build with the Windows Driver Kit, and they include the following in the license: ... Okay. Is it possible to include my possible future UIA code into GTK+ codebase if I use the Windows SDK headers? (Provided that my code will be quality, of course.) (I didn't yet research where my possible future UIA code goes to: probably to ATK, but I didn't study yet.) BR, Evgeniy ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
GTK+ Licensing query
Hi, I am new to Linux development and would like to develop a GUI using gtk+. The following are my queries 1. Can I write a close source software using GTK+? 2. Do I need my source code to be licensed under GNU LGPL 2.1? 3. I would like to use dbus libs along with GTK+. Is it pissible under the same license. 4. Is it possible to run the application on KDE desktop also? I am sorry, if I asked any funny questions. Thanks regards, Sushil k Deka ___ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
Re: GTK+ Licensing query
On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 14:32 +0530, sushil wrote: Hi, I am new to Linux development and would like to develop a GUI using gtk+. The following are my queries 1. Can I write a close source software using GTK+? Short answer: yes, you just have to share any modifications you make to GTK+ (probably none). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License for details. 2. Do I need my source code to be licensed under GNU LGPL 2.1? No, but I would ask you to seriously consider an open source license. For me, the perceived advantages of proprietary software seem to be outweighed by the extra attention/help you will receive with open software. Although anyone can get the app for free, you are the expert that can help with support/customization, and that knowledge/experience is the truly valuable part. 3. I would like to use dbus libs along with GTK+. Is it pissible under the same license. dbus is dual licensed, GPL (your program must be open), or APL(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Free_License) which would be how you had to license it for it to not be open. 4. Is it possible to run the application on KDE desktop also? Yes, as long as the GTK+ libraries are installed (almost a certainty on nearly every distro). I am sorry, if I asked any funny questions. Thanks regards, Sushil k Deka Hope that helps. -Larry la...@yrral.net ___ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
Licensing question related to UTF-8 code in GLib
Hi! I have written a library [1] that is currently under consideration for (at least partial) inclusion in Ruby 2.0 [2]. I used GLib as a reference implementation while writing this library and I am thus wondering exactly how licensing works in this situation. GLib is released under the LGPL and Ruby is released under its own license [3]. According to the Wikipedia entry [4], the FSF has claimed that: This is a Free Software license, compatible with the GPL via an explicit dual-licensing clause. [5] I thus wonder if there is any issue in including code based on [6] code in GLib in a project licensed under the Ruby license. Thanks! nikolai [1] http://git.bitwi.se/?p=ruby-character-encodings.git;a=summary [2] http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ [3] http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txt [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_License [5] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses [6] For some value of based on, I suppose ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: Licensing question related to UTF-8 code in GLib
I'm quite sure that this means that code that's licensed under the ruby license can be relicensed under the gpl, but not the other way around, ie. (l)gpl code cannot be relicensed under the ruby license. For example, the BSD license is said to be compatible with the GPL aswell, but that surely doesn't mean that any gpl code can be relicensed as bsd licensed code. As for glib, it's lgpl, so it's no problem to dynamically link to it, from code that's licensed under the ruby license, but modifying, and/or relicensing glib under the ruby license is probably not allowed. Greets, Lieven van der Heide On 8/27/07, Nikolai Weibull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I have written a library [1] that is currently under consideration for (at least partial) inclusion in Ruby 2.0 [2]. I used GLib as a reference implementation while writing this library and I am thus wondering exactly how licensing works in this situation. GLib is released under the LGPL and Ruby is released under its own license [3]. According to the Wikipedia entry [4], the FSF has claimed that: This is a Free Software license, compatible with the GPL via an explicit dual-licensing clause. [5] I thus wonder if there is any issue in including code based on [6] code in GLib in a project licensed under the Ruby license. Thanks! nikolai [1] http://git.bitwi.se/?p=ruby-character-encodings.git;a=summary [2] http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ [3] http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txt [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_License [5] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses [6] For some value of based on, I suppose ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
