[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug-freedink] Re: Some FreeDink news and a question

From: Seth A. Robinson
Subject: [Bug-freedink] Re: Some FreeDink news and a question
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 08:17:51 +0900
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20080708)

Could you clarify if the Dink 32x32 icon in the dink107_source.zip
archive is covered by the free license from the included license.txt?

Hi Sylvain,

Looking good!

Yes this icon should be covered by that license, I surely don't want a 32X32 
bmp to hold up the release so let me know if I need to add it to the zlib 
graphic pack or such to make it more legally kosher.


Seth A. Robinson

Sylvain Beucler wrote:

Here's some news from the Dink packaging front, and a question about
the Dink icon :)

So, following your release of the Dink scripts and graphics under the
zlib license, I contacted several GNU/Linux distributions.  My overall
impression is that new packages take long to get reviewed and
approved, with lots of time spent on distro-specific policies.
However, there's already some progress:

- Stefan Dirsch, who already knew Dink, was extremely efficient in
  accepting my packages in OpenSUSE, and it's now available from the
  Games repository.

- ArchLinux packages the engine, but not the front-end or the data
  (Petteri Tolonen is working on it).

- I submitted packages for Debian and Fedora in their respective
  format/framework.  The review process involves fixing lots of
  details, hopefully this should be finished within a few weeks.

- I recently submitted packages to Gentoo (in yet another format ;))
  and I'm expecting a reply soon.

- I started adding replacements for the sounds, see
  I had some fun recoding Claude Debussy's RĂªverie and Franz Schubert
  Serenade D957 to MIDI from the public scores, using Rosegarden :)

And I have a question:

It's about a legal clarification for the Dink icon, dink.ico.

The Fedora reviewer checked the different licenses in use and saw the
Dink 32x32 icon came from the official Dink source (as part of the
VC++ project resources).

The license.txt mentions that the "Dink Smallwood Media" is not part
of the source release and not covered by the Dink source license.  So
he concluded that the Dink icon was maybe not covered by the license.
This looks bit far-fetched, but well if that's the only problem I
guess everything else is cristal-clear :)

Could you clarify if the Dink 32x32 icon in the dink107_source.zip
archive is covered by the free license from the included license.txt?

To make things easy, I added 'address@hidden', a public
mailing-list, in carbon copy.  You can reply to the list and I can
show your answer to the Fedora reviewer.

You can answer yes or no, I designed another quick icon in case
there's a problem.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]