-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Gogins wrote:

> I would be overjoyed if you would create an updated Debian package (I
> really mean Ubuntu).

Usually the Ubuntu people just copy the package from Debian with minor
modifications to match the minor differences between Debian and Ubuntu. So
once there is a Debian version, Ubuntu should get one soon.

> 
> As you can see from recent discussions, there may be licensing issues with
> respect to the Steinberg VST SDK that is used by CsoundVST and by the
> vst4cs opcodes. There may also be licensing issues regarding the STK C++
> opcodes (all opcodes whose names begin "STK" are thin wrappers on the
> original STK C++ source code, which must be obtained from the STK web
> site).
> 
> I would like to make certain that the following features are included in
> any Debian/Ubuntu package:
> 
> -- All language interfaces to the Csound API, including Python, Java,
> Lisp, and Lua. 

These I am compiling. However the build system kind of looses me sometimes,
so I don't really know where the language interface are installed (if they
are at all). 

> -- The algorithmic composition features of CsoundVST. 

The current setup builds CSoundVST, but (I think) not the plugin.

> 
> There are no licensing issues regarding these features. I would also like
> to include the following, but we have to resolve the licensing issues:
> 
> -- The VST plugin feature of CsoundVST.
> -- The vst4cs opcodes (which may actually be usable on Linux since there
> are some Linux ports of VST plugins). -- The STK opcodes.


This can't be built because the VST sdk is not ditributed by Debian/Ubuntu
(and AFAIK can't be). 



> 
> Please be aware that there do exist other projects on SourceForge that (a)
> include VST SDK files or depend on the VST SDK, or (b) do not distribute
> sources for everything included in binaries. It might also be possible to
> modify the Csound license (currently LGPL 2) to permit linking with the
> VST SDK and/or the STK.

This seems irrelevant: if other are breaking licenses, that's no reason for
us to break them too.

> 
> Of course we could raise these issues directly with SourceForge
> administrators.
> 
> As John ffitch noted, there is no licensing issue with liblo.

I'm kind of confused here. Is it legal to link a LGPL binary with a GPL
library? I'd suppose it is, since the LGPL is GPL-compatible, but I'm not
sure.

- --

  Felipe Sateler
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGk9pS19K8LkCXFHcRAvzJAJ9vILWSM3u2VvfMq+AnVVKgO4uUJgCfR75d
XVv+OHlEOp0qe9jNC6CLz3o=
=Jfpn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net