Re: [matplotlib-devel] [Matplotlib-users] License, freetype

2017-02-17 Thread Paul Hobson
Chad,

My recollections is that matplotlib doesn't distribute the source code to
FreeType, it only uses it as a dependency. As such, MPL is in the clear
with its more permissive licensing.
-Paul

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:45 PM, CAB  wrote:

> Hi, All,
>
> I just went to install matplotlib version 2.0.0, and it has a dependency
> called "freetype". This software appears to be licensed under GPL3.  My
> reading of that latter license is that, if someone wanted to distribute a
> compiled version of a program requiring matplotlib, that entire program
> would fall under the GPL3 license.  I'm sure that would be a non-starter
> for many, many projects.
>
> Does anyone have any takes on this?
>
> Chad
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Matplotlib-users mailing list
> matplotlib-us...@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Matplotlib-devel mailing list
Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel


Re: [matplotlib-devel] [Matplotlib-users] License, freetype

2017-02-17 Thread Joe Kington
Well, if Freetype were only distributed under the GPL, you couldn't
distribute matplotlib in binary form without providing the source code.

However, Freetype is distributed under more than one license.  (see:
https://www.freetype.org/license.html )

Because it's distributed under a BSD-style license in addition to the GPL,
it can be distributed in binary form, subject to an accreditation clause:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/tree/docs/FTL.TXT

In the past, I have gotten approval from corporate lawyers at a very large
company to use freetype (and matplotlib) in an application that was being
distributed in binary form.  The dual-licensing of freetype was key in that
particular case.

Or that's my take on it, anyway.  I'm not a Lawyer, so don't consider this
legal advice in any way.
Cheers!
-Joe

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Paul Hobson  wrote:

> Chad,
>
> My recollections is that matplotlib doesn't distribute the source code to
> FreeType, it only uses it as a dependency. As such, MPL is in the clear
> with its more permissive licensing.
> -Paul
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:45 PM, CAB  wrote:
>
>> Hi, All,
>>
>> I just went to install matplotlib version 2.0.0, and it has a dependency
>> called "freetype". This software appears to be licensed under GPL3.  My
>> reading of that latter license is that, if someone wanted to distribute a
>> compiled version of a program requiring matplotlib, that entire program
>> would fall under the GPL3 license.  I'm sure that would be a non-starter
>> for many, many projects.
>>
>> Does anyone have any takes on this?
>>
>> Chad
>>
>> 
>> --
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> ___
>> Matplotlib-users mailing list
>> matplotlib-us...@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
>>
>>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Matplotlib-devel mailing list
Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel