[PD] pidip

[Pagano, Patrick]

It has a ton of effects that Gem does not have
There is not really a comparison. Gem does not compete so to speak because Gem does other things supremely well


-----Original Message-----
From: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at] On Behalf Of me.grimm
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 11:08 AM
To: Hans-Christoph Steiner
Cc: pd-list at iem.at; John Harrison
Subject: Re: [PD] pidip

i would wonder. what does pidip got that gem does not?
and cant those things that it got that gem does not be added to gem via original gpl code?
why have more than one vid lib
at least in pdx

m

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:
>
> I'm not aware of that.  Perhaps you're thinking about how pidip should 
> all be GPL, since it is based on GPL code.  The GPL does not allow 
> more license restrictions, and the pidip license does just that.  So 
> that means that the GPL code included in pidip is still GPL, but the 
> code that sevy contributed is under his license, and those two 
> licenses conflict. So basically, pidip is not legal to distribute in 
> binary form because of the conflicting licenses within itself.
>
> Whether you choose to ignore copyright law is your decision.  I am 
> personally fine with people distributing pidip as its own thing and 
> using it with any of my code as long as:
>
> 1) the pidip distro is clearly marked as non-free
> 2) pidip is not bundled with my GPLed code (i.e. as part of 
> pd-extended, pd-l2ork, etc.)
>
> .hc
>
> On 02/06/2013 11:44 AM, John Harrison wrote:
>> I thought there was an earlier version of PiDiP which was and could 
>> be included with Pd-extended because it was released under an 
>> acceptable/compatible license?
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Just be aware that pidip is not free software because it has clauses 
>>> in its license that restrict what it can be used for.  Including 
>>> pidip in your package means your package can no longer be legally 
>>> distributed as binaries since the pidip license terms conflict with the GPL license terms.
>>>
>>> .hc
>>>
>>> On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
>>>> I just finished cleaning up both pdp and pidip libs to be fully
>>> auto-buildable
>>>> as part of pd-l2ork (including freenect, artoolkit, opencv, etc.). 
>>>> There
>>> are a
>>>> number of packages you need to install from launchpad in order to 
>>>> get
>>> all the
>>>> externals to build. Stay tuned for the next release coming soon 
>>>> with
>>> these
>>>> enhancements...
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list



--
____________________
m.e.grimm | m.f.a | ed.m.
megrimm at gmail.com
_________________________________

_______________________________________________
Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list