----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Marvin Humphrey marvin@rectangular.com Cc: Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx; "pd-dev@iem.at" pd-dev@iem.at Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 3:56 PM Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Unit tests
On Sep 29, 2011, at 1:27 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 01:04:12AM -0400, Chris McCormick wrote:
Argh, please hold on a second. I have just realised that I do not have
the
authority to do this. I should have asked two other people who
contributed
unit tests. Sorry about that, I will get back to you.
You caught it before the release, which is the important thing! And before
a
commit, and before I even had the chance to look through it. So no harm
done
and thanks for staying on top of things!
It also sounds as if the other people may have contributed tests, but not touched the framework -- in which case, perhaps their IP could be omitted
from
the contribution if it turns out that either or both are not amenable to granting an additional license.
Marvin Humphrey
Can I ask, why are pushing the BSD license? I am curious because it seems you are more interested in convincing people to use the BSD license than anything else in Pd so far.
I don't think it matters at all and would like to refrain from getting into a list argument about the pluses and minuses of all the licenses used by Pd and its externals. Pd Vanilla is 3-clause BSD, and according to IOhannes so is the stuff on the patch tracker. That gives plenty of room for someone like Marvin to develop solely using the 3-clause BSD license.
I would only say that the valid constraint of using only one free license shouldn't add a constant burden to other developers who are fine with the many free licenses that exist in Pd and its external libraries.
-Jonathan
.hc
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev