[PD] Licensing issues (was rjdj is gone, robotcowboy is coming ...)
msp at ucsd.edu
Sun Nov 4 00:35:26 CET 2012
That's on my list for 0.44... not there yet though (and I'm up to my eyes
in debugging problems right now :)
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 01:16:49PM -0700, Scott R. Looney wrote:
> for me, it's more a matter that a lot of objects are available that make
> the basic coding and patch building tasks themselves much easier. the one
> that currently comes to mind is [coll] which is part of cyclone. i really
> have no idea what can be substituted for it that only requires PD vanilla,
> but i'm coming from Max, and not having good list management is an obstacle.
> is there is a good way for PD-vanilla to read and manipulate a list of
> lists like coll? or split lists? i can make my own [counter] and [swap]
> objects easily enough, but having no obvious and apparent means of
> storage/recall/manipulation, except arrays and tables which are one index
> one value. not trying to pull this off the licensing discussion, but i'm
> trying to point out a genuine storage/manipulation need here. i'm happy to
> stay with vanilla only if PD can do these things. [qlist] + [textfile] are
> the closest but seem to come with severe manipulation restrictions. cyclone
> comes with [zl] manipulation.
> if i'm needlessly complaining please let me know. i'm just a midrange
> MaxMSP guy trying to see how to get something running on iOS.
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll chime in on what Peter said.
> > Pd-Extended itself doesn't have a global license, the licenses are
> > individual to the externals. libpd itself is BSD so we can use it on iOS
> > while some externals are GPL and we can't. I personally would *like* to
> > have some available, but I also value the GPL and would not wish anyone to
> > change a license just for my convenience at a cost to protections the GPL
> > is designed to ensure. I'm not anti-Apple or anti-GPL, it's just a
> > pragmatic approach to getting a working solution on good hardware.
> > Unfortunately, Android still does not have good audio latency worked out,
> > for instance.
> > As I told Frank B, I've seen the "vanilla light". There is a whole lot you
> > can do without externals and I'd highly recommend checking out rjlib:
> > https://github.com/rjdj/rjlib. I will be rebuilding my patch library to
> > work with rjlib and be vanilla compatible as it's the best way to know it
> > works in libpd-land as well as on desktop.
> > On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:08 AM, pd-list-request at iem.at wrote:
> > *From: *Peter Kirn <peter at createdigitalmedia.net>
> > *Subject: **Re: [PD] Licensing issues (was rjdj is gone, robotcowboy is
> > coming ...)*
> > *Date: *November 3, 2012 7:17:06 AM EDT
> > *To: *pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> > Hello, I just want to chime in here.
> > I don't think it's accurate to say pd-extended is "GPL." pd-extended is
> > essentially a distribution of externals, abstractions, and other
> > conveniences. Obviously, developers are free to use what license they want.
> > Yes, libpd and Pd-vanilla use an extremely permissive license.
> > I believe it's possible to develop free software for iOS. I think on
> > reflection it makes a stronger statement to reach that platform -
> > locked-down as it may be - with free software than it does to ignore it.
> > This means using a BSD- or MIT-style license and not GPL or LGPL; the
> > earlier thread was right. Note that I think you *can* use a copyleft
> > license for your patches, because these will run independently of iOS.
> > There are other reasons - compatibility and simplicity being foremost - to
> > favor vanilla in development with libpd whether or not you're using iOS. I
> > think we may be overstating the problem here a bit.
> > In other words, yes, Apple has a problem with GPL. But libpd developers I
> > think don't have a problem with Apple, if that makes sense. And I think we
> > make a stronger statement by showing how well the free solution works than
> > we do banging our head against a brick wall.
> > I believe in the GPL license, which is why we're using it on MeeBlip. But
> > I think the short answer is, use BSD with libpd, try to default to vanilla,
> > and maximize the contexts with which your software can be used. Add GPL or
> > copyleft to patches to encourage others to share. That for me seems a
> > pretty nice solution.
> > Now, Apple aside, it does seem that it makes sense for external developers
> > to use the same license as Pd. (Patches and abstractions are a different
> > issues, because they're effectively content rather than part of your code.)
> > But that's up to developers.
> > Peter
> > --------
> > Dan Wilcox
> > danomatika.com
> > robotcowboy.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
More information about the Pd-list