Should Qsampler be dropped from Ubuntu archives?
Yvan Vander Sanden
yvan at youngmusic.org
Wed Nov 28 14:44:45 GMT 2007
Luis de Bethencourt wrote:
> If you say it is so close to gpl... Why don't they license it gpl or
> any other known license with a foundation behind?
> When a linuxsampler developer gives me a valid purpose I will start
> agreeing with them. Or they license it gpl or any other free license
> for that matter, we will ship it by default.
> For now, they have their own license, which is never cool. And that
> license has ambiguos terms as you mention, that can be taken to be
> very free or dictatorship. As a contributor to a distro that deploys
> software to a _LOT_ of people. I can't take the risk of
> misinterpreting a license, and breaking it, or even worse, making the
> users break it.
> Not talking about you, Yvan, but most end users don't care about
> licenses. So we have to care for us and for them. Sadly enough, free
> software development isn't excempt of a lot of legal issues (which are
> boring and tedious).
I agree. It is a sound reason to refuse software if it's not GPL. I was
only worried because I thought there was a misinterpretation, and a
judgment made for the wrong reasons could polarize people. As a final
point I'd like to mention i don't use samplers myself. So it doesn't
have anything to do with my personal preferences.
More information about the Ubuntu-Studio-devel