[Mesa-dev] talloc (Was: Merge criteria for glsl2 branch)
jfonseca at vmware.com
Wed Aug 11 16:42:34 PDT 2010
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 12:52 -0700, Ian Romanick wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> José Fonseca wrote:
> > Could then Aras Pranckevicius's talloc port to windows be merged into
> > glsl2 branch before glsl2 is merged into master?
> I think we learned our lesson with GLEW. Trying to keep a copy of an
> external dependency in our tree only leads to sadness. I have no
> intention to repeat that mistake.
Having the GLEW source was quite useful for windows. I guess the lesson
would not be not ship source, but only build it if necessary. If talloc
source is not needed for Linux then we can just build it when absent.
You can even ignore it from automake.
> I suspect there may also be some issue with including a piece of
> software with such a different license in our tree. I'm not a lawyer,
> so I may be unnecessarily paranoid here. *shrug*
I'm not a lawyer neither but this is paranoid IMHO. How the source of
multiple open source works is layed out or packaged is seldom prescribed
in open source licenses. It's all about how multiple works are linked
into binary form and distributed.
LGPLv3 is quite clear here on this matter too, per
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html , point 4 "Combined Works", and
point 5, "Combined Libraries".
If indeed, LGPLv3 puts us in muddy waters then the talloc dependency
should never be added. Keeping its source out of mesa alters nothing. So
let's be consistent here.
FWIW, the talloc dependency is not worth its salt.
More information about the mesa-dev