Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clutter's Cogl Relicensed To Be More Permissive

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Clutter's Cogl Relicensed To Be More Permissive

    Phoronix: Clutter's Cogl Relicensed To Be More Permissive

    An effort led by Intel Linux developers has resulted in Cogl being made availablw now under the MIT license instead of the LGPL. Cogl is the GNOME/Clutter project that provides a low-level OpenGL abstraction library...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU3MTY

  • #2
    probably a very silly question but...
    cogl+mesa=mantle-like setting utilised by linux for years?

    Comment


    • #3
      >__<

      ruined my day

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Annabel View Post
        ruined my day
        This is Intel... companies have a track record of not liking the (L)GPL.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          Phoronix: Clutter's Cogl Relicensed To Be More Permissive

          An effort led by Intel Linux developers has resulted in Cogl being made availablw now under the MIT license instead of the LGPL. Cogl is the GNOME/Clutter project that provides a low-level OpenGL abstraction library...

          http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU3MTY
          Waiting for Honton.

          GNOME is killing copyleft blah blah.

          He'll be here any moment now.... or not?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jakubo View Post
            probably a very silly question but...
            cogl+mesa=mantle-like setting utilised by linux for years?
            cogl sits on top of OpenGL, while Mantle was supposed to replace OpenGL.
            cogl is the painkiller (a shitty one), Mantle is/was supposed to be the cure (a good one).

            Comment


            • #7
              Because if you don't use copyleft, evil companies will steal your code and all will be lost!
              Oh wait, companies publish and contribute to permissive code...

              Sarcasm aside, it's a good news. Permissive code contributed by corporations is the sign that open source is valid as a business model, and not just because people believe in it or that it is protected by (non universal and hard to enforce) copyright laws.
              And being economically attractive is generally stronger than just being legal.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm typically happy with lgpl + static link clause. Dynamic linking in some cases is a huge inconvenience for packaging.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I don't get the hate of GPL fans. If people understand the benefits of open source, we don't need a complex and (legally) messy license like GPL. More and more people and companies are embracing open source, so we're slowly getting to that point.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jakubo View Post
                    probably a very silly question but...
                    cogl+mesa=mantle-like setting utilised by linux for years?
                    No, quite the opposite. Cogl provides some additional abstraction on top of OpenGL or OpenGL ES.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X