Frank Barknecht fbar at footils.org
Tue Mar 27 22:50:11 CEST 2007

Chuckk Hubbard hat gesagt: // Chuckk Hubbard wrote:

> I believe Csound is under LGPL, and if I understand correctly the main
> difference is that people who use parts of it in commercial
> applications are not required to keep their source open.
> Someone else will know better, but to my understanding that makes
> Csound more open than Pd.

This depends on how you define "open". Pd has a more permissive
license than the LGPL. You can embed Pd into a proprietary software
and apart from telling, that you did so, you have no further
obligations (that's why Max can use parts of Pd inside). With Csound
this is not allowed: If you distribute a (possibly changed) binary of
Csound, you have to make available your changes freely as well and
give us the source to them. So with Csound, you are required to open
source changes, with Pd you're not. In this regard, Csound is more
"open" than Pd because it enforces openness while Pd doesn't give a
thing. ;)

 Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__

More information about the Pd-list mailing list