I plan to use SDL in a game development. Unfortunately, the game will
probably be proprietary, altough I’d rather have it free, I didn’t
convince my contractor yet.
I’ve got questions about libSDL license, it is not very clear from what
I see different informations in different places :
the COPYING file is the Library GPL
the http://www.libsdl.org/license.php page says it’s the
Lesser GPL v2 and that I have to include source or object code of
my project, and it links to the Library GPL
I plan to use SDL in a game development. Unfortunately, the game will
probably be proprietary, altough I’d rather have it free, I didn’t
convince my contractor yet.
I’ve got questions about libSDL license, it is not very clear from what
I see different informations in different places :
the COPYING file is the Library GPL
the Simple DirectMedia Layer - License page says it’s the
Lesser GPL v2 and that I have to include source or object code of
my project, and it links to the Library GPL
The Lesser GPL “counts as the successor of the GNU Library General
Public License”. But does it supercede it ?
Thanks in advance for your advice on this!
The COPYING file in the SDL source directory has the “true” license for the code.
You don’t have to include source or object code, as long as you link to SDL as a DLL.
Basically, all the license requires in that respect is that a user can drop in a modified version
of SDL and have the program use that instead (subject to binary compatibility limitations).
As for the Library/Lesser GPL issue, the Lesser GPL acts like a later version of the Library GPL.
This means that, if a program is released under the Library GPL, you can choose to go by the terms of
the Lesser GPL instead.
Chris E.
Note: I am not a lawyer, nor am I an official SDL developer. I think I am correct in what I say, but don’t sue me if I’m wrong ;-).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20041220/bac50d94/attachment.pgp
I plan to use SDL in a game development. Unfortunately, the game will
probably be proprietary, altough I’d rather have it free, I didn’t
convince my contractor yet.
I’ve got questions about libSDL license, it is not very clear from what
I see different informations in different places :
the COPYING file is the Library GPL
the Simple DirectMedia Layer - License page says it’s the
Lesser GPL v2 and that I have to include source or object code of
my project, and it links to the Library GPL
No you dont. It is one of the ways to comply with LGPL. However,
dynamic linking to SDL is another way.
The only source code you have to publish is whatever changes you make
to SDL itself.>
The COPYING file in the SDL source directory has the “true” license
for the code. You don’t have to include source or object code, as long
as you link to SDL as a DLL. Basically, all the license requires in
that respect is that a user can drop in a modified version of SDL and
have the program use that instead (subject to binary compatibility
limitations).
Ok, many thanks to you and Michel for clarifying this :-)On 20 Dec 2004 at 10h12, Chris E. wrote:
Hello Chris et al,On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:09:04 +0000 “Chris E.” wrote:
Colin Leroy wrote:
Hi guys,
I plan to use SDL in a game development. Unfortunately, the game will
probably be proprietary, altough I’d rather have it free, I didn’t
convince my contractor yet.
I’ve got questions about libSDL license, it is not very clear from what
I see different informations in different places :
the COPYING file is the Library GPL
the Simple DirectMedia Layer - License page says it’s the
Lesser GPL v2 and that I have to include source or object code of
my project, and it links to the Library GPL
The Lesser GPL “counts as the successor of the GNU Library General
Public License”. But does it supercede it ?
Thanks in advance for your advice on this!
The COPYING file in the SDL source directory has the “true” license for the code.
You don’t have to include source or object code, as long as you link to SDL as a DLL.
[snip]
To link yes… but what about to ship? Is is possible to ship the SDL .dll
within commercial products, or is it up to the user to install SDL?
Quite off-topic but still related, I wonder if you can ship a GNU tool like
diff.exe within a commercial win32 app.
To link yes… but what about to ship? Is is possible to ship the SDL
.dll within commercial products, or is it up to the user to install
SDL?
I think I’ve understood that I can ship SDL.dll in a proprietary
product, as long as there is a written offer to offer its source. I
guess pointing to libsdl.org in a README is enough…On 20 Dec 2004 at 11h12, wwp wrote:
To link yes… but what about to ship? Is is possible to ship the SDL
.dll within commercial products, or is it up to the user to install
SDL?
I think I’ve understood that I can ship SDL.dll in a proprietary
product, as long as there is a written offer to offer its source. I
guess pointing to libsdl.org in a README is enough…
OK! That was just my 2cts, 'cause linking against a lib and shipping this lib
may be different issues regarding to some licenses. I wish there were a GPL
lawyer service to ask for help sometimes :-).
Regards,On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:41:32 +0100 Colin Leroy wrote:
OK! That was just my 2cts, 'cause linking against a lib and shipping
this lib may be different issues regarding to some licenses. I wish
there were a GPL lawyer service to ask for help sometimes :-).
For such questions, licensing at gnu.org often helps. In this case I asked
directly here because I thought asking gnu.org would have required more
work from them, than asking here.On 20 Dec 2004 at 16h12, wwp wrote:
Do I have to include source of my application,
Do I have to include source of my application,