Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-08-07 Thread Lieven Vandenberghe
Rafael, I would prefer the second option, because we don't distribute the software any longer. Maybe it is sufficient to replace the old license under the copyright line in the C file with the standard LGPL header?We can use version 3 or higher of the LGPL, unless Octave has a different

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-08-06 Thread Stephen Boyd
whatever is easiest. i am happy with semidef_prog having either license. Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Lieven Vandenberghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-06 09:13]: I can see why our license is ambiguous. When we wrote it in 1994, we intended it to mean that the program is entirely free, fo

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-08-06 Thread Rafael Laboissiere
* Lieven Vandenberghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-06 09:13]: > I can see why our license is ambiguous. When we wrote it in 1994, we > intended it to mean that the program is entirely free, for any purpose > (including commercial) and without any restriction. > > If it is easier if we swit

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-08-06 Thread Lieven Vandenberghe
Rafael, I can see why our license is ambiguous. When we wrote it in 1994, we intended it to mean that the program is entirely free, for any purpose (including commercial) and without any restriction. If it is easier if we switch to a standard free license, I would choose the LGPL. Best

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-08-01 Thread Rafael Laboissiere
* Stephen Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-07-31 16:41]: > i (and many others too) do most of my day to day convex optimization > work using cvx, which has a GNU license, but unfortunately, runs on top > of matlab. our plan (hope? goal?) however is to develop a full GNU > system for modeling and

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-07-31 Thread Stephen Boyd
rafael, i am happy to switch the license to GNU, but of course we have to check with lieven. as a coincidence i will see lieven tomorrow, when we can send the final confirmation. however, it should be noted that semideg_prog is really quite old, and there are now far more recent solvers ava

Bug#435214: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-07-31 Thread Rafael Laboissiere
I am one of the members of the Debian Octave Group [1], which maintains the Octave-related packages for the Debian GNU/Linux distribution. Your semidef_prog software, which was ported to Octave by A. S. Hodel, has been packaged for Debian [2] since 1998. Only recently, it has been brought to our

Bug#435214: Clarification of licensing terms of semidef-oct

2007-07-31 Thread Rafael Laboissiere
I am one of the members of the Debian Octave Group [1], which maintains the Octave-related packages for the Debian GNU/Linux distribution. Your semidef_prog software, which was ported to Octave by A. S. Hodel, has been packaged for Debian [2] since 1998. Only recently, it has been brought to our