[Bf-committers] Blender, CSG and Carve

[Ken Hughes]

Poking again.... were the licensing issues resolved?

Ken

Daniel Genrich wrote:
> Hello,
> I wonder if there were ever any license issues. It seems that they were 
> made up by some weird ML posts.
>
> He assured that he wanted his work in blender + have commercial option, 
> all possible with GPL and he is nice with it.
> We like to have nice booleans and I hope we get them.
>
> And gSoC is a great idea actually!
>
> :-)
> Daniel
>
>
> Chris Want schrieb:
>   
>> Ken Hughes wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> This thread kind of died out suddenly last month.  I was just wondering 
>>> if the issue is dead or still being considered.
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>     
>>>       
>> If we we're guaranteed that the licensing issues were sorted out,
>> integration of carve might make a decent "Summer of Code" project.
>> (Since the author of blender's boolean code seems to have
>> disappeared.)
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> P.S. Students interested in Summer of Code should submit their
>> proposals by Monday!
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> Le 13 févr. 08 à 00:43, Tobias Sargeant a écrit :
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> / Hi,
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> />/
>>> />/ I'm the developer of Carve, a fast and robust CSG library (there's
>>> />/ some information here: http://carve-csg.com/). It is currently a
>>> />/ commercial product, licensed to a major mining software company. For a
>>> />/ long time I've considered dual licensing Carve along the same lines of
>>> />/ Qt (free for non-commercial use, separate license for commercial use),
>>> />/ specifically so that it could be incorporated into Blender. I believe
>>> />/ that Carve improves significantly on the CSG code currently available
>>> />/ in Blender.
>>> /
>>> Second license need to be GPL compatible for inclusion in blender.
>>> That means it must be copyleft and you cannot restrict ulterior uses. A
>>> company, if it is prepared to publish his own code could take your
>>> lib from there and abbid to the GPL, and you would have no right to
>>> oppose.
>>>
>>> The first license can be anything
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> /
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> />/ I'd like to know, first, whether there's any interest from blender
>>> />/ developers in pursuing this (maybe CSG isn't an important enough
>>> />/ feature; I'm not sure). If there is, is there anyone who has
>>> />/ experience or advice regarding the associated licensing issues?
>>> /
>>>
>>> CSG isnt important for the moment because of the weakness of the library
>>> we use.  But CSG is a very imporant tool in a modelling package,  
>>> especially
>>> if it can also support trim operations.
>>>
>>> So yes, I'm (and i think all of us) interested if you can improve the  
>>> situation in
>>> that area.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jean-Luc Peurière
>>> jlp at nerim.net <http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers>
>>>     
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>
>