Nobody seems to disapprove this idea, then I'll license it under LGPL, so
other open source projects which use other licenses different than GPL might benefit from it. Hmm, we've got different emails then? ;-) I thought it was already said that unless it is really necessary, you should use another license than the license the project uses. So please stick to GPL. Our license situation is already difficult enough. Thanks.
2013/5/31 Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira <vini.ipsmaker@...400...>
2013/5/31 Martin Owens <doctormo@...400...>
I'm more concerned with what it will be called in the user interface :-) but what's the name of the algorithm? I couldn't find it in the paper.
I didn't find, but the paper homepage ( http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/kopf/pixelart/ ) has a bibtex reference sample and the key used to reference this paper is kopf2011.
2013/5/31 Sebastian Götte <jaseg@...2974...>
On 05/31/2013 04:33 AM, Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira wrote:
What do you guys think about use a more permissive license (LGPLv2.1 and later, MIT, ...) for the library?
If you are writing this from scratch and seperating this into an isolated library, you could just dual-license it with a GPL variant and some sort of commercial license.
If I use a license compatible with GPL (like LGPL), there is no need to dual-license it.
Nobody seems to disapprove this idea, then I'll license it under LGPL, so other open source projects which use other licenses different than GPL might benefit from it.
-- Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira https://about.me/vinipsmaker
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel