[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New version of articulate available
From: |
Peter Chubb |
Subject: |
Re: New version of articulate available |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:56:14 +1100 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.8 Emacs/23.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) |
>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:p
David> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:46:21AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> The GPLv3 states under 5 "Conveying modified source versions"
>>
>> I don't see articulate.ly as a modified source version, unless I
>> misunderstand that term.
David> The whole Lilypond of tomorrow is a modified source version of
David> today, containting parts that various authors licensed as their
David> personal contribution under the GPLv3 to the Lilypond project.
David> And are you going to guarantee that articulate.ly is not going
David> to be changed by anybody but the original copyright holder?
You can do that now under GPLv2.
But I've talked to the lawyers, and will arrange a new release this
week under GPL v3.0. I still can't put in `or later'. But that
should do for now.
>>> But making it an _integral_ part of Lilypond will not be feasible.
>>
>> You're talking about moving the code into a C++ performer, right?
David> Into _anything_ being run as an integral and substantial part
David> of Lilypond operation.
It will never be this. and to avoid any future issue I'd much
rather have it in a `contrib' directory, so it's clear it's
distributed with lilypond but is not a core part of lilypond. It would
then fall under the `collection' rules in the GPL. This would also be
useful for other snippets/scheme/ly libraries.
Currently we don't have a `contrib' tree.
Moving articualte functionality into a performer (which I think is the
right approach long-term) isn't a copyright issue, because you can't
just copy the code (scheme into C++?). The *only* tricky bit, the
only part of articulate that contains any substantial IP, is
calculating trill timings. And it's a real hack full of mostly but not
perfect heuristics, and should probably be redesigned anyway.
Peter C
--
Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia
- Re: New version of articulate available, (continued)
- Re: New version of articulate available, Francisco Vila, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, David Kastrup, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, Graham Percival, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, David Kastrup, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, Graham Percival, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, Peter Chubb, 2011/03/20
- Re: New version of articulate available, David Kastrup, 2011/03/21
- Re: New version of articulate available, Colin Campbell, 2011/03/21
- Re: New version of articulate available, Graham Percival, 2011/03/22
- Re: New version of articulate available, David Kastrup, 2011/03/22
- Re: New version of articulate available,
Peter Chubb <=
- Re: New version of articulate available, David Kastrup, 2011/03/22
- Re: New version of articulate available, Graham Percival, 2011/03/22
- Re: New version of articulate available, Peter Chubb, 2011/03/28
- Re: New version of articulate available, Francisco Vila, 2011/03/29
- Re: New version of articulate available, Carl Sorensen, 2011/03/20