[PD] Keyboard shortcuts for "nudge", "done editing"

[Jonathan Wilkes]

----- Original Message -----

> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> To: Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca>
> Cc: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com>; "pd-list at iem.at" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 12:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [PD] Keyboard shortcuts for "nudge", "done editing"
> 
> 
> On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> 
>>  Le 2011-09-25 à 22:59:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :
>> 
>>>  It's been forked-- four times (AFAIK).  Nova, DesireData, 
> Pd-extended, and Pd-l2ork.  Two of those forks-- Nova and DesireData-- had 
> explicitly stated goals which basically boiled down to being more responsive to 
> the Pd community (in addition to many other things).
>> 
>>  Have you ever looked at Nova ?
>> 
>>  It's never been a branch of Pd in any sense, and it's never been 
> compatible with Pd except in very superficial ways : even MAX is more Pd-like 
> than Nova.
>> 
>>>  The three clauses of the BSD license used by Pd Vanilla are compatible 
> with both
>>>  the GPL v2 & v3
>> 
>>  Integrating GPL code with BSD code makes GPL the overall dominant license, 
> as in it has all the clauses of BSD and makes the most restrictions. The BSD 
> license still applies to any portions still under BSD license.
>> 
>>  The pdextended license (GPL) doesn't say to which parts of the 
> programme it applies, and all the copyright/license notices I can find (in a 
> bêta of 42) are all BSD. Changes & additions to BSD code don't have to 
> be under the BSD license, thus if it's not stated, it's somewhat harder 
> to make any assumptions...
>> 
>>  That kind of license fuzz is tolerated because pd developers have no 
> expectation that lawyers ever have to put their nose in the project... and even 
> if they did, they would not have the background to know how to fix it, or know 
> which advice they can trust. I think that this is true of many (if not most) 
> open/free projects.
> 
> 
> Pd-extended as a whole is under the GPLv3, that's the easiest way to think 
> about it.  Some sections of it are under the BSD License, some under the Tcl 
> License (which Pd was originally), some under GPLv2, etc.

I guess by "Pd-extended as a whole" you are including externals (since you mention 
the Tcl license, which I only ever saw in an external library).  In that case, add LGPL
to the list (iemlib if I'm remembering correctly).

-Jonathan

> 
> My personal thoughts on the license of what is in pd-extended.git are more 
> vague.  Yes, the intention is for much/most of that code to contributed back to 
> Pd, but my only distribution of the whole thing is part of the Pd-extended 
> package, which is GPLv3.  So if you want to be sure, consider it GPLv3.
> 
> .hc
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is publicity.        
>   - Bill Moyers
>