Re: Liscensing again: PPlay Releae

[Jan Ekholm <chakie@infa.abo.fi>]

On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Adrian Ratnapala wrote:

>The only remaining problem is Zombie.  Well, it might be OK
>too, depending on which bits are GPL and which are LGPL and
>what the LGPL actually says.  Alternatively Jan could
>give special permission to "combine" it with PPlay (depending
>on how Zombie ontributions are done I guess).  Or he could
>relicense it.

I really don't want to discuss license matters. I think [L]GPL is fine. I
can change the license for Zombie when some commercial firm expresses
interest. It is a matter of a:

#! /bin/sh
for i in  `find . -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "Makefile"`; do
	cat $i | sed -e s/GPL/Foo-licence/g > $i.bak
	mv -f $i.bak $i
done
rm LICENSE
cp Foo-licence LICENSE

to change it when needed. At present I think we should target
_Linux_-developers so that we gat a firm userbase. No commercial vendor is
interested in PP yet. It needs code, samples, docs and most importantly
applications that show what it can do. Good games can be done by
'Sunday-developers' if they have a good API, I really think that most
commercial games are just a matter of ripping off the customers and
hipping sh*tty products that just crash.

Why can't people cooperate? 

---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
 Jan 'Chakie' Ekholm |    CS at Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland
    Linux Inside     | I'm the blue screen of death, no-one hears you scream