[PD] looking for other vanilla filters or abstractions for libPD

[Matt Barber]

​There are some things also that can't be translated out of expr into
vanilla Pd, so allowing users to swap in files is kind of abstract. The
lack of a vanilla bitwise XOR [^] in vanilla has been killing me lately.
It's in expr, but there's really no viable substitute for it using vanilla
objects. I'm sure there are others, but that's the one on my mind lately,
and the only thing from expr I routinely use.

Matt

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:

> And checking the expr~ License.txt it’s LGPL v3, so again I’m wrong. Doh.
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
> On Nov 7, 2015, at 2:02 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Clarification: LGPL v2 YES, LGPL v3 NO :D
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
> On Nov 7, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Actually, as I recall, LGPL is kosher *if* you also publish the source
> code so users can rebuild the software. Isn’t this correct Jonathan? At
> least that was how I was approaching PdParty.
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
> On Nov 7, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, this is correct. I was wrong in the last mail.
>
> Since the externals are built and linked when building libpd as iOS
> doesn’t allow dynamic linking, there’s no way to satisfy the distribution
> clause in the LGPL. I was thinking about *abstraction* libraries earlier
> which are OK as long as you can allow users to update them. I do this in
> PdParty by exposing the lib folder and make it easy to swap in new versions
> of those files. Of course this works since they are not binary compiled
> libraries.
>
> I was hoping for expr adopting a BSD license for this issue, but I also
> understand if the authors choose not to. I’m pretty sure everything else
> distributed in the pd vanilla sources is BSD.
>
> Also, I’m sure there are apps running with expr~ etc in the App Store. You
> only have to add those files to your build tree when building libpd and
> call their setup function. I doubt there is a automatic mechanism Apple is
> using to detect such things.
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <https://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
> On Nov 7, 2015, at 1:08 PM, pd-list-request at lists.iem.at wrote:
>
> *From: *"Scott R. Looney" <scottrlooney at gmail.com>
> *Date: *November 7, 2015 at 12:24:44 PM MST
> *To: *"pd-list at lists.iem.at" <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> *Subject: **Re: [PD] looking for other vanilla filters or abstractions
> for libPD*
>
>
> thanks Jonathan. this is what i assumed re LGPL when i saw a discussion
> about using fluidsynth in a build, which has a LGPL variant but not
> anything more permissive. so one question would be if anyone here on the
> list had a paid app rejected or accepted on the App Store due to using an
> LGPL license? expr and expr~ are very useful for a variety of things but
> for now i'm not using them due to this offchance.
>
> i would further guess that FSF's exact words on LGPL were probably pretty
> dark on using the iTunes Store in general. i've seen some announcements
> from them in the past that made it clear how they feel about walled gardens.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20151107/516b8b90/attachment-0001.html>