« ODA and Bricscad form their own "ITC" | Main | This week in upFront.eZine: ODA and Bricsys Form Their Own "ITC" and CorelDraw Graphics Suite X5 »

Mar 08, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Norm C.

Funny, I hadn't seen that Esperanto page. But it looks like the English link has the same content. And all the documentation from the successor project LibreDWG seems to be in an actual living language (English).

It surely won't ever be a real contender (but of course you knew that already :-P), still it might develop to be useful to small free and open source projects.

Norm C.

Which makes me think, I've updated my link to the general public info page as you did, instead of the Savannah project development page. Thanks.

Henrik Vallgren

The license model is GPL which makes it uninteresting for almost any potential user.

Steve Johnson

I wonder how long it will take for Autodesk's lawyers to shoot off a Cease & Desist letter over the DWG part of the LibreDWG name? I don't think Autodesk has any right to claim exclusive use of the DWG abbreviation, which long predates Autodesk. But that's the position Autodesk is taking and those lawyers need to keep billing for something, no matter how silly it makes their client look.

J Gerth

Henrik

The notion that GPL licensing makes software libraries 'uninteresting' seems rather preposterous on the face of it -- considering the number of FOSS and commercial entities that utilize GPL and other FOSS licensed software in their operations.

Especially in the context of ralph's current headline post (2010/03/11), the GPL nature of the GNULibreDWG is highly interesting. It's doubtful based on current practices if Autodesk's heirs and assigns will will be of much use recovering design data from v2007 dwg files in 2062.

Norm C.

I think Henrik meant that the GPL is an extremely limiting license, it means only projects licensed under the same GPL can use it - thus a lot of potential users won't benefit from it. The Lesser GPL would be less restrictive.

Steve Johnson

It's unlikely that many people will be particularly interested in a library that doesn't support any of the current century's DWG formats. I support oben formats and love to see underdogs succeed, but I can't see much hope here.

CADDIT

It fits. Esperanto is more or less an academic exercise - like their library itself. Compressed DXF would already be more productive.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Thank you for visiting!

Translate

Search This Blog


  •  

Advertisements