Had to google to see why the relation to ircam, I understand now this was written as part of JMax, which has the GNU’s Lesser General Public License.

cool

I wonder if anyone still uses Jmax :)

I really think Ircam shouldn't mind this at all, and it'd be great to see this issue finally over with

again, is there anyone still using jmax?

cheers

2015-11-09 4:33 GMT-02:00 Shahrokh Yadegari <sdy@ucsd.edu>:

I am happy to distribute expr/expr~/fexpr~ objects on BSD license. The original expr code that I wrote at IRCAM, was made available as GLP by IRCAM, and later they were kind enough to change that to LGPL. They may be fine with BSD as well. I will ask and find out.

best,

Shahrokh

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:

Shahrokh is working on a new release of the expr family of objects (0.5)

I'm copying him here, and I wouldn't know what his restrictions or issues would be regarding the license. Maybe if properly discussed with him, we could find a way to choose a license that is suitable for the libpd apps.

I agree that expr is essencial and such limitation would be bad for Pd apps.

cheers

2015-11-07 17:24 GMT-02:00 Scott R. Looney <scottrlooney@gmail.com>:

thanks Jonathan. this is what i assumed re LGPL when i saw a discussion about using fluidsynth in a build, which has a LGPL variant but not anything more permissive. so one question would be if anyone here on the list had a paid app rejected or accepted on the App Store due to using an LGPL license? expr and expr~ are very useful for a variety of things but for now i'm not using them due to this offchance.

i would further guess that FSF's exact words on LGPL were probably pretty dark on using the iTunes Store in general. i've seen some announcements from them in the past that made it clear how they feel about walled gardens.

best,

scott

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list <pd-list@lists.iem.at> wrote:

> As of about 2 years ago, expr and relatives are LGPL and thus compatible with the App Store.

I emailed the Free Software Foundation, who are the publishers of the LGPL.  They responded 

that the LGPL is not compatible with the restrictive terms of Apple's app store.

I forgot to ask them in advance if I could publicly post their response.  If they say I can do so, I'll post their actual response.  But it sounded pretty clear.

I suppose one could argue if it's a free app then who cares, and that the copyright holders of expr (or even Apple) are extremely unlikely to create a licensing fuss.    But then that's the case whether expr is GPL, LGPL, or even "don't use this to murder people with drones" license.

If you want to write/use open source software that's compatible with Apple's app store, use 

the 3-clause BSD license.

-Jonathan

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

--

Shahrokh Yadegari
Professor of Composition and Sound Design,
Theatre and Dance Department
University of California, San Diego
Director, Initiative for Digital Exploration of Arts and Science, (IDEAS)
California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technologies (Calit2)
Email: sdy@ucsd.edu
Web: http://yadegari.org
Tel: (858) 822-4113
Fax: (858) 534-1080

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list