On Feb 7, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Zachary Pincus <zachary.pincus@yale.edu> wrote:
That's a decent idea -- and that way, we could only fetch the appropriate binary for each bdist, instead of shipping all of them.
Any way to make the install command do this as well, for those who install from source?
In either case, though, I'm a bit out of my element in the distutils hackery to make this sort of thing happen...
As a start, how about just getting a Python script going for doing the fetching + moving? Once that is done, I think it won't be too hard to get distutils to play along. At worst, we can tell all Windows/Mac users to do
from skimage import install_libs install_libs()
after installation.
OK, as soon as github is back working I'll make a repo to hold the binaries. Can anyone (Christoph?) send me a win64 FreeImage DLL that I can include? Zach
As a start, how about just getting a Python script going for doing the fetching + moving? Once that is done, I think it won't be too hard to get distutils to play along. At worst, we can tell all Windows/Mac users to do
from skimage import install_libs install_libs()
after installation.
OK, as soon as github is back working I'll make a repo to hold the binaries. Can anyone (Christoph?) send me a win64 FreeImage DLL that I can include?
Also, is anyone a license-maven? Is this sort of thing (distributing binaries, then downloading and run-time loading them in a BSD-licensced project) OK under the GPL (v2) or the FreeImage license? http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/license.html
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Zachary Pincus <zachary.pincus@yale.edu> wrote:
Also, is anyone a license-maven? Is this sort of thing (distributing binaries, then downloading and run-time loading them in a BSD-licensced project) OK under the GPL (v2) or the FreeImage license? http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/license.html
Meh, licensing :) My take (and these issues are tricky, so IANAL and all that): The combined work (skimage + freeimage) must be distributed under the terms of the GPL. Our license (the Modified BSD) is more permissive than the GPL, so the GPL simply imposes some additional restrictions. As far as I understand, you are within your rights to distribute patches to GPL code under any license you wish (which is, in a tenuous sense, what we're doing). When we distribute skimage + the freeimage plugin (but no freeimage binary), our distribution is only governed by the permissive BSD. E.g., a company may use our code with the Matlotlib backend, mix it in with their own (proprietary) code, and not have to worry about anything. If we write the "install_libs" command, we may want to clearly state what the implications are. Also, an interesting perspective on incorporating BSD code into GPL projects: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html Stéfan
participants (2)
-
Stéfan van der Walt -
Zachary Pincus