[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #28 from Mario Sanchez Prada <msanchez at igalia.com> 2011-06-02 06:05:06 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> I would keep src/flicksoup files as LGPLv3 if your long term plan/hope is to
> ship it as a separate library. If you get external patches to src/flicksoup,
> you don't want to be stuck with GPLv3 licensing the day you want to make it an
> external library.

Yeah, I for sure would prefer not to touch the license, just putting options
over the table, not consider to go ahead with any of them yet.

> Apart from that, your plan makes sense to me. Another option might be to
> install flicksoup as a .so as part of flickr "make install", and to also
> install .h files. This way, the library can be put in separate lib/-devel
> subpackages. However, this is not a really good solution, since I'm under the
> impression that if someone tries to use it, things will break every time frogr
> gets upgraded.

Already though of that (actually at the beginning frogr used flicksoup in that
way), but if I'm shipping an application and not a library I think it's better
to build flicksoup files inside of it as a static object, as it's being done
now.

> I don't know if this is OK wrt fedora guidelines, but at least your plan 
> makes sense to me.

Glad to hear that. Hopefully only (A) will be needed (I do not like much (B)
and (C)) :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.