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

[Craig Bradney]

On Thursday 15 March 2007 20:18:32 Craig Ringer wrote:
> 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.

The abstraction of CMM is planned post Scribus 1.3.5, Jean has this planned 
already.

Craig