(And obviously, the patch will need to be modified if we go with the
"wxWindows/wxWidgets license, License, as defined at
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/wxwindows.php" type of wording.
On 2/10/2012 4:05 PM, Vaughan Johnson wrote:
> On 12/29/2011 1:06 PM, Gale (Audacity Team) wrote:
>> "Gale (Audacity Team)" wrote:
>>> ImageManipulation.cpp was waiting for Dominic to confirm if the
>>> wxWidgets licence was acceptable, so I marked that and
>>> ImageManipulation.h as "provisionally" licensed under wxWidgets
>>> for want of any further information.
>> I asked Dominic and he said to post the following here:
>> "I hereby release all code contributed by me, Dominic Mazzoni, in the
>> files src/ImageManipulation.cpp and src/ImageManipulation.h, under both
>> GPL v2 license as used by Audacity, and also under the wxWindows License
>> wxWidgets License, as defined here:
>> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/wxwindows.php "
>> If as per:
>> the wxWidgets Licence is still "pending approval", maybe our source files
>> are currently under "wxWidgets license" should say "wxWindows License", or
>> dual license them as per Dominic?
> I vote dual license. Also, I finally reviewed the patch you offered to
> change those headers. They're all James's code, I believe, so James,
> please review that patch (re-attached here), and give thumbs up/down.
>> James wrote:
>>> If those files are GPL v2 they can't migrate to wxWidgets.
>>>> On 07/06/2011 06:01, Vaughan Johnson wrote:
>>>>> I notice there are places in the code that say "This file is licensed
>>>>> under the wxWidgets license, see License.txt". But there's nothing
>>>>> wxWidgets in LICENSE.txt. Isn't it more accurate to say GPL v2? Why
>>>>> refer to wxWidgets there?
>>>>> Plus, we have a standard header
>>>>> should at least be used for all new files rather than making up new
>>>>> varieties. :-)
>>>>> - Vaughan
>> View this message in context: http://audacity.238276.n2.nabble.com/wxWidgets-license-tp6448039p7136743.html
>> Sent from the audacity-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
>> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
>> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual
>> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure
>> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> audacity-devel mailing list