Re: Module proposal: Empathy for GNOME 2.22

On 9/27/07, Mikael Hallendal <micke imendio com> wrote:
> 27 sep 2007 kl. 16.00 skrev Luis Villa:
> Hi,
> >>> It is of course their call. And likewise it is the GNOME community's
> >>> call not to accept libraries licensed as such.
> >>>
> >>> We have a very longstanding and very deliberate policy to license
> >>> our
> >>> libraries LGPL, and it has served us well. This is not the time to
> >>> change it, *especially* since we want these libraries to be deeply
> >>> embedded into all of GNOME, not just some applications.
> >>
> >> I'm a bit unsure about how useful libempathy-gtk would be for third
> >> party applications? Do we have any use cases for this as a library.
> >>  From the way I suggested at the time of the fork was to make Empathy
> >> run on top of Telepathy and create the required applications for
> >> integrating with mission control etc. This doesn't require an
> >> external library though.
> >>
> >> For example I can't see the chat dialog widgets to be all that useful
> >> to other applications as they should preferably message Empathy to
> >> show a chat dialog for a specific user. The same with most of the
> >> other widgets, roster widget and possibly vcard/info dialogs
> >> excluded.
> >
> > It is entirely possible that this libempathy is one of those
> > extraneous libraries that is at the wrong level to make LGPL relevant-
> > I'm even less of an expert on this stuff than I was when I was active
> > :)
> >
> > My point was that the choice to include a GPL library should be made
> > based on the project's policy, not based on the preferences of the
> > authors of the library.
> Yes, I completely agree.
> My fault for using your mail to reply to even though I was replying
> more in general and not to your comment.

No, my fault, I wasn't clear in my response, and frankly hadn't
completely realized the libempathy/libtelepathy distinction.


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