Re: Question for a FLOSS licensing session

[Edward Ardzinski]

Does this matter to the average user?  Probably not.  But some here use LP for 
more than I do.

But I'm not sure why the programming should be separated from the output?  
>From my perspective the programming IS the music, be it a PDF score or the 
MIDI files I use to make my MP3 demos.

Certainly I see a differentiation license wise between taking the midi and 
rendering the MP3.  I don't have to take that step.  But if I'm using LP to 
make a final product, I certainly need to write the programming code.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 30, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm right now at the GSoC mentors summit and already had a bunch of
> interesting sessions.
> 
> One specific one that is to come this afternoon is a Q&A session about
> FLOSS licensing, done by a FSF lawyer. I want to take the opportunity to
> raise a question that in some way or another pops up around here
> occasionally, circling around the problem that with LilyPond it is often
> difficult to draw a proper line between document content, in-document
> coding and including GPLed code from LilyPond or openLilyLib.
> 
> I have tried to write up the case at
> https://git.openlilylib.org/snippets/2, and if someone wants to comment
> on it within the next three hours I may consider it for my questions.
> 
> Urs
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user