cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Ball <>
Subject Re: Image Serializers
Date Tue, 11 Apr 2000 17:36:26 GMT
On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> > On Mon, 10 Apr 2000, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > 
> > > > Concrete implementations of this interface are responsible for taking
> > > > BufferedImage and outputing it to an OutputStream.  A JPEG implementation
> > > > trivial, as the JDK comes with a JPEG codec.  PNG's are also fairly easy
> > > > there is a Java package called PNGEncoder which is under the LGPL.
> > >
> > > Is there a BSD alternative to that?
> > 
> > What in the world is wrong with the LGPL? code that links against it can
> > have any license whatsoever, we just have to release any modifications we
> > might make to the original library under the LGPL. As viral licenses go, I
> > think LGPL is a good one and we shouldn't hesitate to rely on packages
> > released under it.
> It's not a problem with me or you or anybody that understood the "idea"
> behind open source. But as far as the ASF goes, there are things that
> simply can't work once you have a xGPL license. Problems include people
> from big companies that can't work on a project because a little clause
> in a stupid library says that if you do, all that companies pattents
> must be freely licenced to the FSF or something like that.
> And I don't want to loose people like Sam or James, just because they
> _happen_ to work for a big company.

But that's what I'm saying - their work is _not_ encumbered in any way if
their code _links_ against an LGPL library. LGPL != GPL. The viral clause
_only_ applies to modifications made to the original library. I see no
reason to worry about using LGPL libraries in cocoon's components. I vote
+1 to see the PNG library used unless someone can demonstrate that my
understanding is flawed.

- donald

View raw message