Is it so bad? I used some of the jpegtran code for lossless image flipping/rotation in the Image.JPEG source. We can always revert it...

/ M Norrby (rabies), Shapeline

Previous text:

2002-10-07 08:12: Subject: Copyright

---

I'm not so sure about that any more. There has been some really fliphanded code-contamination recently.

/ Peter Bortas

OK. Perhaps I should have discussed it a bit more with you before the checkins. I only talked with Martin about it... Sorry for that.

(But the code in image_jpeg.c still uses code from the libjpeg-dist, so the libjpeg README file must still be included and _some_ notice in the COPYRIGHT file (for binary dists) have to be included, according to the README file in the libjpeg-dist. Even without my changes.)

/ M Norrby (rabies), Shapeline

Previous text:

2002-10-07 09:25: Subject: Re: Copyright

---

Sounds great to me. :)

/ Brevbäraren

Good stuff; let's formalize and document in the policy page. Is this a good proposal:

If you cut and paste code from external sources (libraries and the like) into Pike, mark the affected areas in the code with a begin and end comment, like this:

/* Start of code borrowed from libjpeg/6b */

[...]

/* End of code borrowed from libjpeg/6b */

The same goes for code inspired by other code to the degree where the code can be said to be based on the original, in the copyright sense of the word. The reasoning behind this rule is to simplify reverting the code, in case we would have to, at a later date, for any reason. Naturally, you replace "libjpeg/6b" with the name and version (where applicable) of your source.

/ Johan Sundström (ska bli kalif i stället för kalifen)

Previous text:

2002-10-07 10:05: Subject: Copyright

---

No, the JPEG license is pretty benign, and the features you have added are well worth the code inclusion if it's needed. I'm a bit doubtful that it was a good idea to include new code in a working codepath before 7.5, but that is between me and Nilsson and nothing you need to feel guilty about.

I have a suggestion though: Anyone cut-ing and pasting code should mark the affected areas in the code. with a begin and an end comment if it would be needed to revert it for some reason at a later date. The same for code inspired by other code to the degree where the code can be said to be based on the original in the copyright sense of the word.

/ Peter Bortas

More importantly, it makes it simpler to merge the code with new releases of the borrowed code.

/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)

Previous text:

2002-10-07 10:05: Subject: Copyright

---

No, the JPEG license is pretty benign, and the features you have added are well worth the code inclusion if it's needed. I'm a bit doubtful that it was a good idea to include new code in a working codepath before 7.5, but that is between me and Nilsson and nothing you need to feel guilty about.

I have a suggestion though: Anyone cut-ing and pasting code should mark the affected areas in the code. with a begin and an end comment if it would be needed to revert it for some reason at a later date. The same for code inspired by other code to the degree where the code can be said to be based on the original in the copyright sense of the word.

/ Peter Bortas

Well, it certanly broke things.

/ Peter Bortas

Previous text:

2002-10-07 13:13: Subject: Copyright

---

I considered it to be a low impact, well contained addition that will have a positive impact on existing code (curently you'll have to call external processes). I still have no word from hop regarding the dvb module, to connect with the subject.

/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)