CGAL 3.2 is going to be released in a few days. I've been in contact
with the upstream developers to resolve the license issues.
1) Anything that goes into libCGAL.a and libCGALQt.a is licensed under
LGPL. There are no QPL'd files involved in the build of those libraries.
2) The examples as well
> After doing QPL-cleanup:
> $ rm `grep -lr LICENSE.QPL .`
>
> Build do fails. There seems to be some debug headers that the core
> uses.
Thanks for pointing out.
Regards,
Joachim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECT
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 08:04:40PM +0100, Joachim Reichel wrote:
> > How does upstream release version 3.1 of CGAL, actually fixes these
> > issues?
>
> The license of some files was changed such that all files in the Kernel
> and Support Library are licensed under LGPL, the files in the Basic
>
Hi Toni,
> How does upstream release version 3.1 of CGAL, actually fixes these
> issues?
The license of some files was changed such that all files in the Kernel
and Support Library are licensed under LGPL, the files in the Basic
Library are licensed under QPL. In particlar, all *.C files that end
Hi,
How does upstream release version 3.1 of CGAL, actually fixes these
issues? I don't see any changes in the license since lgpl/qpl dual
licensing.
--
Toni Timonen
NP-Ratkaisut Oy
Teknillinen Korkeakoulu/Teknillinen Fysiikka
040-5111863,GPG 0x7984A4FD, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ #45732842 irc://irc
Recently, upstream release version 3.1 of CGAL that should fix the
licenses issues. I will look into the package in the next weeks.
Regard,
Joachim
Recently, upstream release version 3.1 of CGAL that should fix the
licenses issues. I will look into the package in the next weeks.
Regard,
Joachim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joachim Reichel wrote:
>> If the two licenses only applied to different libraries that linked to
>> each other, they would be compatible, because the scope of the LGPL
>> deliberately stops at the library boundary. However, the LGPL requires
>> that all code which directly incorporates LGPLed code
Hi,
If the two licenses only applied to different libraries that linked to
each other, they would be compatible, because the scope of the LGPL
deliberately stops at the library boundary. However, the LGPL requires
that all code which directly incorporates LGPLed code be LGPLed.
[...]
So any "wo
Joachim Reichel wrote:
> License:
> The library consists of three modules. The lower layers (Kernel and the
> Support library) are licensed under LGPL, the upper layer (Basic Library) is
> licensed under QPL. Code under LGPL and code under QPL is combined in one
> library.
>
> I've CC'ed debian-le
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: cgal
Version : 3.0.1
Upstream Author : CGAL Developers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cgal.org/
* License : partly LGPL, partly QPL (see below)
Description : C++ library for computational geometry
11 matches
Mail list logo
