On 11 May 2003, at 14:52, David Neary wrote: > Sven Neumann wrote: > > David Neary <bolsh@xxxxxxxx> writes: > The way I see it, there are 3 solutions - > > 1) Accept that SIOD stays, and if repackagers want to distributee the > GIMP as non-free, then so be it. Either copy gif code from another gpl > program (say gif2png) or contact opriginal author for re-licencing, or > add it as an exception. Contact nlfilter author for relicencing, or > drop plug-in. If the contacts don't yielmd answers by the end of this > week, we should make a decision. > > For the rest of the code, either acknowledge that there is code > that needs relicencing, and get onto the people who did it, or > declare that all the code that was taken from bsd licenced > software was fairly trivial, and re-licence under GPL. For the > most part, the latter should do. > > 2) Continue to delay the release of a bug-fix patch for the gimp > until we have a new, fully tested scheme interpreter, and we can > get in contact with anyone who ever wrote code for the gimp and > didn't realise that the BSD advertising clause was incompatible > with the GPL (even if they're now working a humanitarian aid > worker in the Peru highlands who haven't looked at a computer > since they wrote a gimp plug-in as their final year project). > > I think we should go for 1, send requests to relicence bits of > borrowed code to GPL for the important bits, just declare > ourselves compliant and relicence for the trivial bits, add SIOD > as an exception to our GPL, and if we haven't gotten permission > to relicence nlfilter by next Friday, drop it. If we haven't > gotten permission to relicence gif, steal some gpl code. Or steal some > GPL code now... >From an older thread: > In any case, I think that we should split it into 3 bugs, > nlfilter, gif and SIOD licencing, and for the rest, just declare > everything GPL. > > > > Basically, I think we should have 1.2.4 within the next few days. > > > The CVS is rock stable, we've had a decent shepherd in Sven > > > stopping anything resembling unstable code from going in, and I > > > think it's time for a release. > > > > I whole-heartedly agree and unless Yosh speaks up I volunteer to > > take his job of doing the 1.2.4 release although I really hate to do > > releases in the 1.2 tree. First because Yosh should do them and > > second because 'make dist' doesn't work in 1.2. > > What's wrong with make dist in 1.2? > > In any case, there are now 8 bugs targetted for 1.2.4 > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=GIMP&bug_status=UNCONFIR > MED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status= > REOPENED&target_milestone=1.2.4&form_name=query > > Of these 8, several have been set from 1.2.x. > > Bug #98490 and bug #51164 are up for grabs - very shallow bugs. Who > wants to fix them? > > It would be nice if someone with HPUX could check if bug #15546 is > still alive. > > It would also be nice if someone could check that bug #82465 is > still reproducible. > > Bug #108004 Needs attention before 1.2.4 - once there has been > some analysis done, we can see whether it's feasible to have a > quick fix, or whether it gets batted back to 1.2.5. > > If we want a 1.2.4 release this week, these need to be addressed. > > Cheers, > Dave. > > -- > David Neary, > Lyon, France > E-Mail: bolsh@xxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ > Gimp-developer mailing list > Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > > -- branko collin collin@xxxxxxxxx
