CMM support (Was: Re: [Openicc] google SoC starts)

[Craig Ringer]

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:

> GPL does not restrict execution of the "program".  It only enforces
> rules when copying the "program".  From my own viewpoint, if the CMM is
> accessed as a pure loadable module (not using any interfaces or symbols
> from the "program") or external program, and the CMM is not required for
> normal functioning of the "program" then the CMM does not require
> distribution according to GPL rules since it is not part of the
> "program".  Any user-provided CMM could then be used as long as it
> supports the defined interface.

I would agree with that, though I'm no lawyer. Specifically, a plugin to
support the Adobe CMM would not have to be under the GPL because it
would not be a derivative work of Scribus. We could produce a non-GPL
(say BSDL) abstract CMM API and implement it against lcms and the Adobe
CMM. A null/no-op plugin would also not be a bad idea. Scribus's use of
this API and linkage to the plugins would in no way imply a derivative work.

Scribus would benefit from abstracting out its colour management anyway,
since it's currently intertwined with related code that makes it more
difficult to understand, trace, and check than would be ideal.

IMO it's just not a big deal.

> It would be good to have several CMMs available under Linux which all
> offer the same loadable-module interface.

Yep... so again, producing a decent CMM API abstraction would be
desirable. I don't expect it'd be easy by any stretch however, not even
for more basic facilities.

--
Craig Ringer