Re: EEL vs. GAL
- From: Ramiro Estrugo <ramiro eazel com>
- To: Ian McKellar <ian eazel com>
- Cc: Matthias Warkus <mawarkus t-online de>, gnome-hackers gnome org
- Subject: Re: EEL vs. GAL
- Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 20:59:00 -0700
Ian McKellar wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> The major difference I can see between GAL and EEL is that GAL is primarily
> GPLed, and EEL is primarily LGPLed.
>
> My quick count shows 22% (11/49) C files in EEL are GPLed, whereas 1% (1/148)
> of GAL is GPLed. I think the intention is that EEL code can be merged back
> into gtk and gnome-libs. Perhaps the GPLed portions of EEL will end up in GAL.
>
> I've never really been clear on why GAL is GPLed, it seems that it just makes
> it a pain in the arse for us to make these very useful widgets part of the
> standard platform.
>
> Ian (not speaking for Eazel or Ramiro)
>
I never even counted. Making sure the licenses are "right" is somewhere
in a TODO list. The parts written by Eazel hackers are definitely going
to be LGPL. Also, the license for librsvg will be LGPL, even though I
think it currently says GPL. Its very likely that there is cruft in
there that violates the purity of essence of at least 1 person.
Whether this is the "major" difference is of course highly subjective.
-re
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]