 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter J. Holzer <hjp### [at] sikitu wsracat> wrote:
: I will continue to think of Povray as Open Source Software.
I thought that you could use the source code (or parts of it) of this
kind of Open Source Software in your own programs.
You can't do it with povray.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7 Dec 2000 06:40:16 -0500, Warp wrote:
>Peter J. Holzer <hjp### [at] sikituwsracat> wrote:
>: I will continue to think of Povray as Open Source Software.
>
> I thought that you could use the source code (or parts of it) of this
>kind of Open Source Software in your own programs.
> You can't do it with povray.
From the OSD:
The Povray license clearly allows modifications and derived works, and
it allows them to be redistributed under the same license.
It even gives the same reason "2) promote experimentation and
development of new features to the core code which might eventually be
incorporated into the official version" as the rationale of the OSD.
BUT: While most Open Source Licenses have a wide definition of "derived
works" (The GPL sees anything as a derived work which contains a tiny
bit of the original code or is even only linked with it), the Povray
license has a very narrow definition: "a fully functional version of
POV-Ray with all existing features intact." So, Megapov or Povman are
ok, but a modeller which uses only the parser code from povray is not
ok.
Because of this narrow definition, I listed this point as "A partial
match at best".
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Es war nicht Gegenstand der Abstimmung zu
| | | hjp### [at] wsracat | Zahlen neu festzulegen.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Johannes Schwenke <jby### [at] ginkode>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:20:58 +0100, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>Because of this narrow definition, I listed this point as "A partial
>match at best".
Right. Because of this and the distribution clause, the POV-Ray license
is not an Open Source license. It's close, but close doesn't count as we
all know from watching Sun and Netscape and Apple and others stumble
repeatedly over the OSD. Rather than invoke the wrath of Perens, I prefer
to note whenever possible that we don't use that term to describe our
license.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
