On Thursday 21 January 2010 12:02:51 Kassen wrote:
> Alex;
>
> The code is GPLd but the original authors have agreed to also license
>
> > it to apple under different terms. The license doesn't restrict the
> > original authors, it's their copyright. If someone gives you a patch
> > to your code under the GPL you can't relicense that though. So RJ are
> > giving code to the community but are not accepting changes back,
> > unless it comes with a copyright transfer too. I guess ChucK is in
> > the same boat (IANAL).
>
> It might be slightly different. PD is older than ChucK and there actually
> aren't all that many patches to ChucK by third parties; most of the ChucK
> DEV's are in Smule as well. Tom Lieber and me were just talking the other
> day about how to get patches in. Ironically I have been campaigning for
> easier patches to ChucK for years now. Not specifically for me (my C++
> skills are very modest indeed) but I did volunteer to test patches made by
> others.
>
> This is a annoying because man-hours are limited and we do have skilled
> volunteers. We could now speculate that Ge may have been hesitant about
> accepting a more open patching system for exactly this reason.
>
> I'd like a comment on this by Ge, still.
Shred Chuck!!
or what's the appropriate Chuck-slang for fork'ing?
sincerely,
Marije
Received on Fri Jan 22 2010 - 07:12:56 GMT