blazek at itc.it
Thu Nov 27 13:37:46 EST 2003
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 14:44, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Thierry Laronde wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 09:36:06PM +0000, Glynn Clements wrote:
> >>Markus Neteler wrote:
> >>>Mhhh, time to fork the project? Maybe some developers would join you...
> >>>(recalling the license discussion). I agree with you that more radical
> >>>changes are needed, as already posted several times.
> >>>Maybe LGPL'ed libraries with GPL'ed application layer? Well, most
> >>>developers have posted their opinion on this already.
> >>It's not clear to me exactly what Thierry's complaints with the
> >>current direction are, but they don't appear to be related to
> >>GRASS' licensing policy.
> > I think that Markus is looking forward: it's clear that by starting with
> > the Public Domain code, the licence of the future work has to be
> > decided. The licence impacts:
> > - The availability of the source enhancements
> > - The attractivity to developers
> > - The possibility for developers, and primarily the GRASS developers to
> > make a living with GRASS (that is to have time to work on it because
> > they get incomes from it);
> - The possibility for grass to be included in free software distributions.
> AFAIK, BSD with the advertisement clause is not GPL compatible, and not
> considered suitable for use in free software distributions (I may be
> wrong but I think the original BSD does not comply with the Debian
> requirements for free software).
I'am currently looking for a way how to make available my work I have done
on GRASS vectors, under some lincense, allowing to build proprietary
applications for GRASS. BSD with advertisement realy seems to be GPL incompatible
and problematic. The only reasonable license, I know about, is MIT/X.
I am not opposed to some restrictions like an obligation to publish
modified versions, but LGPL has too many unnecessary restrictions.
Do you intend to keep format compatibility with the current and future GRASS 5.0/5.7
versions, i.e. follow changes done by this team?
What are your other plans for development, new features etc.?
Do you have xgrass compiled?
I tried to compile xgrass now (first time) but without success.
It seems that the version in 5.0 is different from 4.3
(and 4.3 is maybe better).
Lesstiff (--enable-build-12) is probably better than Open Motif.
There are many inconsistencies between standard and _NO_PROTO
definitions and compilation with _NO_PROTO seems to be easier.
In any case, I cannot get over:
gcc -O -D_NO_PROTO -Wall -I../include -I/usr/X11R6/include/ -I/amd/ssi0/ssi/blazek/inst/lesstif/lesstif-0.93.91/include/Motif-1.2 -I/amd/ssi0/ssi/blazek/grass4.3src/src/include -DUSE_TERMIO -c grammar.c
In file included from /amd/ssi0/ssi/blazek/grass4.3src/src/include/std_incs.h:33,
/usr/X11R6/include/X11/Intrinsic.h:73: parse error before numeric constant
More information about the grass-dev