MIT is GPL-compatible. It's much more liberal than the GPL. (And thus in my opinion is a far better license.)
It'd probably be simpler to contact the chap who wrote it and arrange to get it under the GPL and under the umbrella of Inkscape rather than as a separate project, and kill off the Google Code one after that (we can even keep all seven revisions of its trunk history).
I imagine we'd also want to change the ID of the extension from bryhoyt.pixelsnap as well.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Joshua A. Andler <scislac@...400...>wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 20:56 +0300, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Hi,
http://code.google.com/p/pixelsnap/
"PixelSnap is an extension for Inkscape, an incredibly useful vector graphics app. It allows you to align rectangles & paths to pixel boundaries, to create sharp web & digital graphics."
Hmmm... given that I'm not familiar with many open source licenses, will this be a political issue? I'm basically wondering if this is deemed an issue by any of our developers to distribute something that is under an MIT license along with Inkscape (which as far as I know the rest of Inkscape is either GPL only or multi-licensed GPL+other stuff).
-- Chris Morgan <chris.morganiser@...400...>
I'm good at making two things: mistakes and enemies.