We are using SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and SDL_ttf. All of these are
supported in part by Sam (along with some other people). However, each one
has a license (README) file that we are suppose to distribute with our game to
comply with the LGPL. Each of these files is identical.
Sam, do we need to have 4 copies of this license file or will one suffice?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Le mercredi 9 Juin 2004 00:40, Ken Rogoway a ?crit :
We are using SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and SDL_ttf. All of these are
supported in part by Sam (along with some other people). However, each one
has a license (README) file that we are suppose to distribute with our game
to comply with the LGPL. Each of these files is identical.
The fact that these libraries are licensed under the LGPL forces you to
release your program under the LGPL.
But you may choose to alter the licensing notices to apply the terms of the
GPL instead.
Your application being under the LGPL and respecting it, adding a COPYING file
is mandatory following the first section. As you cannot alter the notices
that refers to the license, you cannot simply remove the COPYING files.
If you “restructure” the source code of the libraries and put everything in
the same directory, then having one file will suffice as each references to
the LGPL in the source files talks about “COPYING file” and there is one.
Else, if the source code of those libraries are splitted each one in its own
subdirectory or something alike, then the COPYING/README file must present in
each one.
The need for this is the essence of the LGPL : you can make tons of things
with the library, given that
Sam, do we need to have 4 copies of this license file or will one suffice?
So, as stated above, this depends on the structure of your source
distribution, although you are very likely to have 4 copies…
SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl
Michel Nolard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAxscSyAKwOMHoSb0RAsx/AKCeRdSwSQRizGEUzmSkFW2LrN8n2gCfU3w8
PObvqxM8vTkbkm18wuQjme0=
=iGuH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, Sam, I forgot this part in the previous mail :
"Given that Sam is busy, I think that it will be easier for him just to
confirm that this mail is a right explanation
Regards,"
Le mercredi 9 Juin 2004 10:15, Michel Nolard a ?crit :
Le mercredi 9 Juin 2004 00:40, Ken Rogoway a ?crit :
We are using SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and SDL_ttf. All of these are
supported in part by Sam (along with some other people). However, each
one has a license (README) file that we are suppose to distribute with
our game to comply with the LGPL. Each of these files is identical.The fact that these libraries are licensed under the LGPL forces you to
release your program under the LGPL.
-> section 2. c “You must cause the whole of the work to be licensed at no
charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.”But you may choose to alter the licensing notices to apply the terms of the
GPL instead.
-> section 3Your application being under the LGPL and respecting it, adding a COPYING
file is mandatory following the first section. As you cannot alter the
notices that refers to the license, you cannot simply remove the COPYING
files. -> section 1. "You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the
Library’s complete source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided
that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an
appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all
the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and distribute a copy of this License along with the Library. "If you “restructure” the source code of the libraries and put everything in
the same directory, then having one file will suffice as each references to
the LGPL in the source files talks about “COPYING file” and there is one.
Else, if the source code of those libraries are splitted each one in its
own subdirectory or something alike, then the COPYING/README file must
present in each one.The need for this is the essence of the LGPL : you can make tons of things
with the library, given that
- the copyright holder is easy to find out
- the license is readable without having to use another source of
information than the source distribution- the changes made to the original version of the library are stated in
clear notices- the licensing terms of the LGPL are preserved or replaced by the GPL
Sam, do we need to have 4 copies of this license file or will one
suffice?So, as stated above, this depends on the structure of your source
distribution, although you are very likely to have 4 copies…
SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl
Michel Nolard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAxsd6yAKwOMHoSb0RAssuAJ9YE+LYTThgangrABLvWzfa6dp3CQCfeHHu
iQarc2/N3gf6soZIbIL4HWI=
=kdF4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Since Sam is probably busy, once is fine. Its all the same license.On 08-Jun-2004, Ken Rogoway wrote:
We are using SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and SDL_ttf. All of these are
supported in part by Sam (along with some other people). However, each one
has a license (README) file that we are suppose to distribute with our game to
comply with the LGPL. Each of these files is identical.Sam, do we need to have 4 copies of this license file or will one suffice?
SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl
–
Patrick “Diablo-D3” McFarland || unknown at panax.com
"Computer games don’t affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we’d
all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to
repetitive electronic music." – Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20040609/634e6e4a/attachment.pgp
We are using SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and SDL_ttf. All of these are
supported in part by Sam (along with some other people). However, each one
has a license (README) file that we are suppose to distribute with our game to
comply with the LGPL. Each of these files is identical.
Sam, do we need to have 4 copies of this license file or will one suffice?
One is fine, just note in the documentation that each of the libraries use
the license and point them to that file.
See ya,
-Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment
Patrick McFarland <unknown panax.com> writes:
Since Sam is probably busy, once is fine. Its all the same license.
Sam answered. He said one is fine. And to the other posters, no we do not
need to include all the source. We use the SDL DLL’s. Sam has gone over the
usage of DLL’s vs. derivative or static linking many times in previous posts.
There are plenty of examples of commercial apps built around SDL using the
DLL’s and they do not include their source, nor do they include the source of
SDL. Simply offering the SDL packages used to create it is sufficient. We
are doing this at our web site and the game documentation points to that site.
Huh? The “SDL packages used to create it” are the source to SDL. See
LGPL#4.
If commercial apps are distributed with SDL on eg. a CD (and so aren’t
"offering access to copy from a designated place"), then they need to
include the source to the DLL, too. This is often neglected, I think;
it’s mostly harmless, as long as the DLL being used hasn’t been modified
(so people can get the source from any number of other places).
(Unless the SDL interpretation of the LGPL is different from the usual
understanding of it–which I doubt–you might be better off sending these
questions to the FSF.)On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 10:19:13PM +0000, Ken Rogoway wrote:
Sam answered. He said one is fine. And to the other posters, no we do not
need to include all the source. We use the SDL DLL’s. Sam has gone over the
usage of DLL’s vs. derivative or static linking many times in previous posts.
There are plenty of examples of commercial apps built around SDL using the
DLL’s and they do not include their source, nor do they include the source of
SDL. Simply offering the SDL packages used to create it is sufficient. We
are doing this at our web site and the game documentation points to that site.
–
Glenn Maynard
— Glenn Maynard <g_sdl at zewt.org> wrote:> On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 10:19:13PM +0000, Ken Rogoway wrote:
Sam answered. He said one is fine. And to the
other posters, no we do not
need to include all the source. We use the SDL
DLL’s. Sam has gone over the
usage of DLL’s vs. derivative or static linking
many times in previous posts.
There are plenty of examples of commercial apps
built around SDL using the
DLL’s and they do not include their source, nor do
they include the source of
SDL. Simply offering the SDL packages used to
create it is sufficient. We
are doing this at our web site and the game
documentation points to that site.Huh? The “SDL packages used to create it” are the
source to SDL. See
LGPL#4.If commercial apps are distributed with SDL on eg. a
CD (and so aren’t
"offering access to copy from a designated place"),
then they need to
include the source to the DLL, too. This is often
neglected, I think;
it’s mostly harmless, as long as the DLL being used
hasn’t been modified
(so people can get the source from any number of
other places).(Unless the SDL interpretation of the LGPL is
different from the usual
understanding of it–which I doubt–you might be
better off sending these
questions to the FSF.)–
Glenn Maynard
SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl
Could someone take on the responsibility of making
sure that this information finds its way into a clear
an obvious location on the SDL website. Some people
seem to have suggested that this has been a topic of
inquiry in the past, maybe I’m being a little too
obvious here, but maybe then it should be added (or
moved, if it’s already there) to a clearly marked
section of the SDL website.
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.