Kritacolor library re-licensing

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Thursday 22 June 2006 15:05, Cyrille Berger wrote:

> My main concern is that not allowing closed-source plugin for krita, will
> only means that company will support the gimp (or photoshop in fact) and
> the gimp will get all the advertisement and spotlight from them. Maybe that
> is what we want.

We're talking about just kritaimage here -- not all of krita. The chances of 
anything good for is coming from lgpl'ing or bsd'ing kritaimage are slim: we 
won't gain much by having other, closed, applications running on our core. 
The app itself is pretty thoroughly GPL, both historically and because of 
KOffice standards. Changing that is going to be impossible since John Califf 
is thoroughly awol.

The big issue is, of course, plugins. Do we allow closed-source plugins to 
link to our GPL application, or not? That may make some difference in 
commercial support, building an ecosystem around Krita and all that. 

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt 
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20060622/f67f8a95/attachment.pgp