Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard at gmail.com
Wed Mar 28 13:54:30 CEST 2007

On 3/28/07, Chris McCormick <chris at mccormick.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 08:37:46PM -0400, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
> > Was PD previously under GPL?
> No.

Frank explained to me that Pd-extended is under GPL.  I have to go
back and revise the package I created, if only to add the Berkley
license info.  I'm pretty sure I didn't actually use the executable
that was with Pd-extended.

So if version 0.5 is available under BSD license, and the author later
decides to go GPL, could they replace vs 0.5 on sourceforge with an
exact copy except with a different license.txt?  And if someone then
downloaded that same software, aware that it was BSD, and violated GPL
thinking it was still BSD...
A moot point anyway.  I swear I looked once and saw GPL for Pd, but I
guess it was Pd-extended.  Suffice to say Csound is LGPL and AFAIK
completely open.



More information about the Pd-list mailing list