From: Erik K. <eri...@gm...> - 2007-08-05 09:34:08
|
Hello, Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. best regards -- Erik Krause Offenburger Str. 33 79108 Freiburg |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2007-08-05 11:40:20
|
On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: > > Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the > panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he > wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". This is the full list from the ChangeLog: Bret McKee Bruno Postle Daniel M. German Douglas Wilkins Helmut Dersch Jim Watters Kekus Digital Marek Januszewski (specu) Max Lyons Pablo D'Angelo Thomas Rauscher I haven't contributed much more than housekeeping, so I can't really claim anything. I'll agree to the license change for what it's worth. -- Bruno |
From: Thomas R. <tr-...@si...> - 2007-08-05 12:43:16
|
Hello, on 05.08.2007 13:40 Uhr Bruno Postle said the following: > On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: >> Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the >> panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he >> wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. > > It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release > the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need > to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". Very fine with me. I am very glad that Helmut Dersch considered my arguments. -- MfG, Thomas. |
From: Jim W. <jwa...@ph...> - 2007-08-05 21:07:40
|
Thomas Rauscher wrote: > Hello, on 05.08.2007 13:40 Uhr Bruno Postle said the following: > > On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: > >> Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the > >> panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he > >> wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. > > > > It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release > > the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need > > to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". > > Very fine with me. I am very glad that Helmut Dersch considered my > arguments. > > -- > MfG, > Thomas. > LGPL is good with me too. -- Jim Watters Yahoo ID: j1vvy ymsgr:sendIM?j1vvy jwatters @ photocreations . ca http://photocreations.ca |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2007-08-06 08:46:46
|
Oops, sorry I missed out Rik Littlefield and Fulvio Senore from the list. [Cc'd to panotools-devel] -- Bruno On Mon 06-Aug-2007 at 09:19 +0200, Fulvio Senore wrote: >> >> It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release the >> current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need to agree >> to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". This is the full list >> from the ChangeLog: >> >> Bret McKee >> Bruno Postle >> Daniel M. German >> Douglas Wilkins >> Helmut Dersch >> Jim Watters >> Kekus Digital >> Marek Januszewski (specu) >> Max Lyons >> Pablo D'Angelo >> Thomas Rauscher >> > The list is not complete. I added fast transform, and I remember that Rik > Littlefield speeded up the optimizer a lot. > I agree to the license change. |
From: Thomas R. <tr-...@si...> - 2007-08-06 12:21:23
|
Hello, on 06.08.2007 10:46 Uhr Bruno Postle said the following: > Oops, sorry I missed out Rik Littlefield and Fulvio Senore from the > list. And Joost.... -- MfG, Thomas |
From: Pablo d'A. <pab...@we...> - 2007-08-06 22:14:45
|
Bruno Postle schrieb: > On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: >> Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the >> panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he >> wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. > > It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release > the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need > to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". This is > the full list from the ChangeLog: I agree to license my contributions to pano12 as LGPL. ciao Pablo |
From: Kekus D. <ke...@ke...> - 2007-08-07 02:19:32
|
On Aug 5, 2007, at 4:40 AM, Bruno Postle wrote: > On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: >> >> Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the >> panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he >> wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. > > It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release > the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need > to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". This is > the full list from the ChangeLog: > That is fine by me. Also, my contributions can remain in 13 as GPL. Kekus Digital Kevin Kratzke > Bret McKee > Bruno Postle > Daniel M. German > Douglas Wilkins > Helmut Dersch > Jim Watters > Kekus Digital > Marek Januszewski (specu) > Max Lyons > Pablo D'Angelo > Thomas Rauscher > > I haven't contributed much more than housekeeping, so I can't really > claim anything. I'll agree to the license change for what it's > worth. > > -- > Bruno > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a > browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > PanoTools-devel mailing list > Pan...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/panotools-devel |
From: Max L. <max...@ve...> - 2007-08-05 12:01:57
|
> It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release > the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need > to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". It is fine with me. Max |
From: yuval l. <yuv...@ya...> - 2007-08-05 14:26:24
|
the next logical step is for him to join this project, if only to assert his "founding father" role, or (wishful thinking) to give new direction and impetus to the development of the tools. Yuv --- Erik Krause <eri...@gm...> wrote: > Hello, > > Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a > clarification of the > panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools > and said he > wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. > > best regards > -- > Erik Krause > Offenburger Str. 33 > 79108 Freiburg > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? > Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using > AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> > http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > PanoTools-devel mailing list > Pan...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/panotools-devel > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ |
From: Daniel M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2007-08-06 02:34:45
|
Bruno> On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 11:33 +0200, Erik Krause wrote: >> >> Helmut Dersch just posted to PanotoolsNG a clarification of the >> panotools license. He affirms the GPL for panotools and said he >> wanted to change the pano12 license to LGPL. Bruno> It's nice to have a clarification. Note that in order to re-release Bruno> the current pano12 branch under the LGPL, all the contributors need Bruno> to agree to this work being under the "LGPL v2 or later". This is Bruno> the full list from the ChangeLog: I'll be happy to donate my changes in the latest version to Helmut. This will simplify any change in license. His message is a bit cryptic. He seems to imply that he will release his latest version of pano12.dll as LGPL, not the sourceforge version. He has stated that the change in license is not retroactive. This creates interesting legal repercusions. If he does not take command of the pano12 branch, then it can't be LGPLed automatically. It will be necessary to create a patch to whatever he releases as the LGPL-pano12 and marge them accordingly. Sourceforge's Pano12 is a derivative work of the (old) GPL version, hence GPL. It needs to become a derivative work of the LGPL version. If he is not interested in continuing developing pano13, then the same should be done with it. That way pano13 GPL legal standing is independent of him. dmg Bruno> Bret McKee Bruno> Bruno Postle Bruno> Daniel M. German Bruno> Douglas Wilkins Bruno> Helmut Dersch Bruno> Jim Watters Bruno> Kekus Digital Bruno> Marek Januszewski (specu) Bruno> Max Lyons Bruno> Pablo D'Angelo Bruno> Thomas Rauscher Bruno> I haven't contributed much more than housekeeping, so I can't really Bruno> claim anything. I'll agree to the license change for what it's Bruno> worth. Bruno> -- Bruno> Bruno Bruno> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bruno> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Bruno> Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Bruno> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Bruno> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ Bruno> _______________________________________________ Bruno> PanoTools-devel mailing list Bruno> Pan...@li... Bruno> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/panotools-devel -- -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2007-08-06 09:05:26
|
On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 19:33 -0700, Daniel M. German wrote: > >His message is a bit cryptic. He seems to imply that he will release >his latest version of pano12.dll as LGPL, not the sourceforge version. Helmut can only relicense code that he owns himself. >He has stated that the change in license is not retroactive. I think this is just signalling that the current usage wasn't approved. >This creates interesting legal repercusions. If he does not take >command of the pano12 branch, then it can't be LGPLed >automatically. It will be necessary to create a patch to whatever >he releases as the LGPL-pano12 and marge them accordingly. Only if he releases something with significant differences. >Sourceforge's Pano12 is a derivative work of the (old) GPL version, >hence GPL. It needs to become a derivative work of the LGPL >version. Of course anyone can take the existing GPL sources and continue to release and modify them under the GPL. -- Bruno |
From: Daniel M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2007-08-06 09:43:01
|
Hi Bruno, Bruno> On Sun 05-Aug-2007 at 19:33 -0700, Daniel M. German wrote: >> >> His message is a bit cryptic. He seems to imply that he will release >> his latest version of pano12.dll as LGPL, not the sourceforge version. Bruno> Helmut can only relicense code that he owns himself. Of course. Technically speaking SF panotools and Helmut's panotools are different products. Changing the license of one does not automatically affect the other. What we need is a statement from him that agrees that his code in SourceForge becomes LGPL (plus the acceptance of anybody who has code in it too, which I suspect will not be a problem). Bruno> [...] Bruno> Only if he releases something with significant differences. Let us hope that he comes to this list to make that statement. That will make thing simpler and avoid any complication. >> Sourceforge's Pano12 is a derivative work of the (old) GPL version, >> hence GPL. It needs to become a derivative work of the LGPL >> version. Bruno> Of course anyone can take the existing GPL sources and continue to Bruno> release and modify them under the GPL. Yes, of course. But in this case we are not concerned about this. What we need is to make sure that it properly becomes LGPL. dmg -- -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |
From: yuval l. <yuv...@ya...> - 2007-08-06 13:10:32
|
Hi Daniel, --- Daniel M German <dm...@uv...> wrote: > Technically speaking SF panotools and Helmut's > panotools are different products. Changing the > license of one does not automatically affect > the other. exactly, and I think Helmut did the sensible thing, not only technically, but also humanly. His approach is opening the door to merge those two products and avoid a fork with SF-PT being the GPL part of the fork and HD-PT being the LGPL part of the fork. > Let us hope that he comes to this list Yes, the people who will be in Luzern should talk with him about joining this list - the SF project. IMO technically the SF infrastructure has proven itself as the best repository for the tools and it would be great if he would adopt it too. > Bruno> Of course anyone can take the existing GPL > Bruno> sources and continue to > Bruno> release and modify them under the GPL. > > Yes, of course. But in this case we are not > concerned about this. What > we need is to make sure that it properly becomes > LGPL. good to read this, Daniel! It is great to see the community uniting again. So what are your plans for tlalli, which to my understanding is effectively a GPL fork of SF-pano ? Yuv ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ |
From: Daniel M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2007-08-06 18:58:19
|
Hi Yuval, yuval> Hi Daniel, yuval> --- Daniel M German <dm...@uv...> wrote: >> Technically speaking SF panotools and Helmut's >> panotools are different products. Changing the >> license of one does not automatically affect >> the other. yuval> exactly, and I think Helmut did the sensible thing, yuval> not only technically, but also humanly. His approach yuval> is opening the door to merge those two products and yuval> avoid a fork with SF-PT being the GPL part of the fork yuval> and HD-PT being the LGPL part of the fork. Well, this is still a problem. SF-Pano13 is, and will continue to be GPL. I suggest we hold decisions on what and who is to L-GPL what until we know more from Helmut we are all speculating. The change of license to LGPL is a step forward. The LGLP will be very good for those with commercial interests, but not for me. It will mean that I will be giving away my contributions to commercial entities without proper compensation. This is unacceptable to me. For that reason I will not LGPL pano13 (Pablo and I are the only contributors of the diffs from pano12 to pano13) I will, however, donate some of my contributions to Helmut, if he is to continue maintaining the panotools. -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |