From mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 15:22:04 2011 From: mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com (Mathieu Malaterre) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 16:22:04 +0100 Subject: [Ctk-developers] pythonqt questions Message-ID: Dear CTK hackers, I am looking at: https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt Would it be possible for one of you guys to confirm what is the license uses by this patched PythonQt fork (in particular the cmakelists.txt files). I would think this is an apache 2.0 license (http://www.commontk.org/LICENSE). On a different subject is upstream going to integrate changes done for CTK (eg. src/PythonQtStdIn.* & generated_cpp/PythonQt_QtBindings.*) back to the official repository ? Thanks, -- Mathieu From pieper at bwh.harvard.edu Mon Mar 7 16:13:48 2011 From: pieper at bwh.harvard.edu (Steve Pieper) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:13:48 -0500 Subject: [Ctk-developers] pythonqt questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D75043C.8020907@bwh.harvard.edu> Hi Mathieu - Jc can comment more fully, but I think yes, we want the CTK code to be licensed under apache2, but since PythonQt is LGPL we may need to apply that to some patches, which I think would be okay. Regarding the upstream integration we can't say - the package is pretty much complete so it doesn't see much activity. We certainly make the patches available and would be glad to see them in the main distribution. Best, steve On 03/07/2011 10:22 AM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Dear CTK hackers, > > I am looking at: > > https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt > > Would it be possible for one of you guys to confirm what is the > license uses by this patched PythonQt fork (in particular the > cmakelists.txt files). I would think this is an apache 2.0 license > (http://www.commontk.org/LICENSE). > > On a different subject is upstream going to integrate changes done > for CTK (eg. src/PythonQtStdIn.*& > generated_cpp/PythonQt_QtBindings.*) back to the official repository ? > > Thanks, From mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com Wed Mar 9 08:44:34 2011 From: mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com (Mathieu Malaterre) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 09:44:34 +0100 Subject: [Ctk-developers] Indiana License ? Message-ID: Hi, CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE Thanks -- Mathieu From julien.finet at kitware.com Wed Mar 9 19:59:41 2011 From: julien.finet at kitware.com (Julien Finet) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 14:59:41 -0500 Subject: [Ctk-developers] Indiana License ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Mathieu, You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. Thanks for the notification, Julien. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre < mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? > > > https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE > > Thanks > -- > Mathieu > _______________________________________________ > Ctk-developers mailing list > Ctk-developers at commontk.org > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 08:05:46 2011 From: mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com (Mathieu Malaterre) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:05:46 +0100 Subject: [Ctk-developers] PythonQt: No Commercial Usage (was Re: Indiana License ?) Message-ID: Hi Julien ! Thanks for taking the time to answer. I have yet another question on the same subject. Could you guys comment on the license used in pythonqt: https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt/blob/patched/generator/abstractmetabuilder.cpp ... ** This file is part of the Qt Script Generator project on Qt Labs. ** ** $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$ ** No Commercial Usage ** This file contains pre-release code and may not be distributed. ** You may use this file in accordance with the terms and conditions ** contained in the Technology Preview License Agreement accompanying ** this package. ... As far as I know PythonQt is already used in MevisLab, which is a commercial product. Thanks again, On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Julien Finet wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. > Thanks for the notification, > Julien. > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> ?CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? >> >> >> https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE >> >> Thanks >> -- >> Mathieu >> _______________________________________________ >> Ctk-developers mailing list >> Ctk-developers at commontk.org >> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > > -- Mathieu From mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 14:11:46 2011 From: mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com (Mathieu Malaterre) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:11:46 +0100 Subject: [Ctk-developers] PythonQt: No Commercial Usage (was Re: Indiana License ?) In-Reply-To: <4D78A96E.4060703@mevis.de> References: <4D78A96E.4060703@mevis.de> Message-ID: Florian, Thanks a lot for your precision. I did not pay attention to the 'alternatively' section. regards On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Florian Link wrote: > > ?Hi everyone, > > if you continue reading the header file, it says: > > ** GNU Lesser General Public License Usage > ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU Lesser > ** General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software > ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the > ** packaging of this file. ?Please review the following information to > ** ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 requirements > ** will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html. > > Note the "Alternatively", so these files are available as LGPL as well, but > they are not available > under a commercial Qt license. > > Appart from this, these files are only used for generation of the wrappers, > the generated wrappers > themselves are not copyrighted as far as I am concerned (or some lawyer > might argue that an LGPL > tool that generates files generates LGPLed files...). The generator used to > be GPL, but Nokia changed that > to LGPL a while ago. > > The wrapper generator is not part of the MeVisLab SDK, nor is it compiled > into the PythonQt DLLs, only the generated wrappers are. > > regards, > Florian > > > Am 10.03.2011 09:05, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: >> >> Hi Julien ! >> >> ? Thanks for taking the time to answer. I have yet another question on >> the same subject. Could you guys comment on the license used in >> pythonqt: >> >> >> https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt/blob/patched/generator/abstractmetabuilder.cpp >> >> ... >> ** This file is part of the Qt Script Generator project on Qt Labs. >> ** >> ** $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$ >> ** No Commercial Usage >> ** This file contains pre-release code and may not be distributed. >> ** You may use this file in accordance with the terms and conditions >> ** contained in the Technology Preview License Agreement accompanying >> ** this package. >> ... >> >> ? As far as I know PythonQt is already used in MevisLab, which is a >> commercial product. >> >> Thanks again, >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Julien Finet >> ?wrote: >>> >>> Hi Mathieu, >>> You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. >>> Thanks for the notification, >>> Julien. >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre >>> ?wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> ?CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -- >>>> Mathieu >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ctk-developers mailing list >>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org >>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers >>> >> >> > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Florian Link > Chief Software Architect MeVisLab > > Tel.: +49-421-22495 52 > Fax: ?+49-421-22495 11 > www.mevis.de > > MeVis Medical Solutions AG > Universitaetsallee 29 > 28359 Bremen > Germany > > Trade Registry: Bremen HRB 23791 > VAT ID: DE250659412 > > Executive Board: Carl J.G. Evertsz, Ph.D. (Chairman& ?CEO), Robert Hannemann > Ph.D., Thomas E. Tynes > Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Ph.D. > > > -- Mathieu From stephen.aylward at kitware.com Thu Mar 10 15:08:08 2011 From: stephen.aylward at kitware.com (Stephen Aylward) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:08:08 -0500 Subject: [Ctk-developers] PythonQt: No Commercial Usage (was Re: Indiana License ?) In-Reply-To: References: <4D78A96E.4060703@mevis.de> Message-ID: Hi, So - I'm not fully following the thread....is this code in CTK? If so, is it available under a BSD license? If it is not in CTK, then we can instruct people on how to download and use it to build CTK - and if it is LGPL, we can even use superbuild if we also include instructions on how to manually do it in the documentation. However, if it is in CTK's git repo, then it must be a BSD license. This was determined from the start of CTK. Regardless of how it is used in CTK, all code in CTK must be BSD, or confusion ensues for future users...and companies will simply walk away from CTK if they know it contains any LGPL code - lawyers don't care about nuances of how it is used, they simply will deny their company's ability to use it. Thanks, Stephen On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Florian, > > ?Thanks a lot for your precision. I did not pay attention to the > 'alternatively' section. > > regards > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Florian Link wrote: >> >> ?Hi everyone, >> >> if you continue reading the header file, it says: >> >> ** GNU Lesser General Public License Usage >> ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU Lesser >> ** General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software >> ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the >> ** packaging of this file. ?Please review the following information to >> ** ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 requirements >> ** will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html. >> >> Note the "Alternatively", so these files are available as LGPL as well, but >> they are not available >> under a commercial Qt license. >> >> Appart from this, these files are only used for generation of the wrappers, >> the generated wrappers >> themselves are not copyrighted as far as I am concerned (or some lawyer >> might argue that an LGPL >> tool that generates files generates LGPLed files...). The generator used to >> be GPL, but Nokia changed that >> to LGPL a while ago. >> >> The wrapper generator is not part of the MeVisLab SDK, nor is it compiled >> into the PythonQt DLLs, only the generated wrappers are. >> >> regards, >> Florian >> >> >> Am 10.03.2011 09:05, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: >>> >>> Hi Julien ! >>> >>> ? Thanks for taking the time to answer. I have yet another question on >>> the same subject. Could you guys comment on the license used in >>> pythonqt: >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt/blob/patched/generator/abstractmetabuilder.cpp >>> >>> ... >>> ** This file is part of the Qt Script Generator project on Qt Labs. >>> ** >>> ** $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$ >>> ** No Commercial Usage >>> ** This file contains pre-release code and may not be distributed. >>> ** You may use this file in accordance with the terms and conditions >>> ** contained in the Technology Preview License Agreement accompanying >>> ** this package. >>> ... >>> >>> ? As far as I know PythonQt is already used in MevisLab, which is a >>> commercial product. >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Julien Finet >>> ?wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Mathieu, >>>> You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. >>>> Thanks for the notification, >>>> Julien. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre >>>> ?wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> ?CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -- >>>>> Mathieu >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ctk-developers mailing list >>>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org >>>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Florian Link >> Chief Software Architect MeVisLab >> >> Tel.: +49-421-22495 52 >> Fax: ?+49-421-22495 11 >> www.mevis.de >> >> MeVis Medical Solutions AG >> Universitaetsallee 29 >> 28359 Bremen >> Germany >> >> Trade Registry: Bremen HRB 23791 >> VAT ID: DE250659412 >> >> Executive Board: Carl J.G. Evertsz, Ph.D. (Chairman& ?CEO), Robert Hannemann >> Ph.D., Thomas E. Tynes >> Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Ph.D. >> >> >> > > > > -- > Mathieu > _______________________________________________ > Ctk-developers mailing list > Ctk-developers at commontk.org > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > -- ============================== Stephen R. Aylward, Ph.D. Director of Medical Imaging Research Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office http://www.kitware.com stephen.aylward (Skype) (919) 969-6990 x300 From julien.finet at kitware.com Thu Mar 10 15:15:11 2011 From: julien.finet at kitware.com (Julien Finet) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:15:11 -0500 Subject: [Ctk-developers] PythonQt: No Commercial Usage (was Re: Indiana License ?) In-Reply-To: References: <4D78A96E.4060703@mevis.de> Message-ID: Stephen, the code Mathieu is referring to is a clone of PythonQt ( https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt), not in CTK( https://github.com/commontk/CTK) itself. However, and I hope it's not an issue, the clone is hosted by the CommonTK github community. For information, all the code in CTK is Apache(2), not BSD (almost the same). Julien. On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Stephen Aylward < stephen.aylward at kitware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > So - I'm not fully following the thread....is this code in CTK? If > so, is it available under a BSD license? > > If it is not in CTK, then we can instruct people on how to download > and use it to build CTK - and if it is LGPL, we can even use > superbuild if we also include instructions on how to manually do it in > the documentation. > > However, if it is in CTK's git repo, then it must be a BSD license. > This was determined from the start of CTK. Regardless of how it is > used in CTK, all code in CTK must be BSD, or confusion ensues for > future users...and companies will simply walk away from CTK if they > know it contains any LGPL code - lawyers don't care about nuances of > how it is used, they simply will deny their company's ability to use > it. > > Thanks, > Stephen > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Mathieu Malaterre > wrote: > > Florian, > > > > Thanks a lot for your precision. I did not pay attention to the > > 'alternatively' section. > > > > regards > > > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Florian Link > wrote: > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> if you continue reading the header file, it says: > >> > >> ** GNU Lesser General Public License Usage > >> ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU > Lesser > >> ** General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software > >> ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the > >> ** packaging of this file. Please review the following information to > >> ** ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 requirements > >> ** will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html. > >> > >> Note the "Alternatively", so these files are available as LGPL as well, > but > >> they are not available > >> under a commercial Qt license. > >> > >> Appart from this, these files are only used for generation of the > wrappers, > >> the generated wrappers > >> themselves are not copyrighted as far as I am concerned (or some lawyer > >> might argue that an LGPL > >> tool that generates files generates LGPLed files...). The generator used > to > >> be GPL, but Nokia changed that > >> to LGPL a while ago. > >> > >> The wrapper generator is not part of the MeVisLab SDK, nor is it > compiled > >> into the PythonQt DLLs, only the generated wrappers are. > >> > >> regards, > >> Florian > >> > >> > >> Am 10.03.2011 09:05, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: > >>> > >>> Hi Julien ! > >>> > >>> Thanks for taking the time to answer. I have yet another question on > >>> the same subject. Could you guys comment on the license used in > >>> pythonqt: > >>> > >>> > >>> > https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt/blob/patched/generator/abstractmetabuilder.cpp > >>> > >>> ... > >>> ** This file is part of the Qt Script Generator project on Qt Labs. > >>> ** > >>> ** $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$ > >>> ** No Commercial Usage > >>> ** This file contains pre-release code and may not be distributed. > >>> ** You may use this file in accordance with the terms and conditions > >>> ** contained in the Technology Preview License Agreement accompanying > >>> ** this package. > >>> ... > >>> > >>> As far as I know PythonQt is already used in MevisLab, which is a > >>> commercial product. > >>> > >>> Thanks again, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Julien Finet > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Mathieu, > >>>> You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. > >>>> Thanks for the notification, > >>>> Julien. > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Mathieu > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Ctk-developers mailing list > >>>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org > >>>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Florian Link > >> Chief Software Architect MeVisLab > >> > >> Tel.: +49-421-22495 52 > >> Fax: +49-421-22495 11 > >> www.mevis.de > >> > >> MeVis Medical Solutions AG > >> Universitaetsallee 29 > >> 28359 Bremen > >> Germany > >> > >> Trade Registry: Bremen HRB 23791 > >> VAT ID: DE250659412 > >> > >> Executive Board: Carl J.G. Evertsz, Ph.D. (Chairman& CEO), Robert > Hannemann > >> Ph.D., Thomas E. Tynes > >> Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Ph.D. > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Mathieu > > _______________________________________________ > > Ctk-developers mailing list > > Ctk-developers at commontk.org > > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > > > > > > -- > > ============================== > Stephen R. Aylward, Ph.D. > Director of Medical Imaging Research > Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office > http://www.kitware.com > stephen.aylward (Skype) > (919) 969-6990 x300 > _______________________________________________ > Ctk-developers mailing list > Ctk-developers at commontk.org > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephen.aylward at kitware.com Thu Mar 10 15:29:08 2011 From: stephen.aylward at kitware.com (Stephen Aylward) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:29:08 -0500 Subject: [Ctk-developers] PythonQt: No Commercial Usage (was Re: Indiana License ?) In-Reply-To: References: <4D78A96E.4060703@mevis.de> Message-ID: Hi, Good points 1) I should have been saying Apache 2 - it is "better" than BSD because it addresses contributions and patents. 2) If the code is not part of the same git checkout, then I agree with you in assuming that we're probably not falling under gnu's definition of combined works. So, I agree that we're probably ok. Sorry for jumping in...was uncertain on what was hosted where. Thanks, Stephen On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Julien Finet wrote: > Stephen, > the code Mathieu is?referring?to is a clone of PythonQt > (https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt), not in > CTK(https://github.com/commontk/CTK)?itself. However, and I hope it's not an > issue, the clone is hosted by the CommonTK github community. > For information, all the code in CTK is Apache(2), not BSD (almost the > same). > Julien. > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Stephen Aylward > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> So - I'm not fully following the thread....is this code in CTK? ? If >> so, is it available under a BSD license? >> >> If it is not in CTK, then we can instruct people on how to download >> and use it to build CTK - and if it is LGPL, we can even use >> superbuild if we also include instructions on how to manually do it in >> the documentation. >> >> However, if it is in CTK's git repo, then it must be a BSD license. >> This was determined from the start of CTK. ? Regardless of how it is >> used in CTK, all code in CTK must be BSD, or confusion ensues for >> future users...and companies will simply walk away from CTK if they >> know it contains any LGPL code - lawyers don't care about nuances of >> how it is used, they simply will deny their company's ability to use >> it. >> >> Thanks, >> Stephen >> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Mathieu Malaterre >> wrote: >> > Florian, >> > >> > ?Thanks a lot for your precision. I did not pay attention to the >> > 'alternatively' section. >> > >> > regards >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Florian Link >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> ?Hi everyone, >> >> >> >> if you continue reading the header file, it says: >> >> >> >> ** GNU Lesser General Public License Usage >> >> ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU >> >> Lesser >> >> ** General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software >> >> ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the >> >> ** packaging of this file. ?Please review the following information to >> >> ** ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 >> >> requirements >> >> ** will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html. >> >> >> >> Note the "Alternatively", so these files are available as LGPL as well, >> >> but >> >> they are not available >> >> under a commercial Qt license. >> >> >> >> Appart from this, these files are only used for generation of the >> >> wrappers, >> >> the generated wrappers >> >> themselves are not copyrighted as far as I am concerned (or some lawyer >> >> might argue that an LGPL >> >> tool that generates files generates LGPLed files...). The generator >> >> used to >> >> be GPL, but Nokia changed that >> >> to LGPL a while ago. >> >> >> >> The wrapper generator is not part of the MeVisLab SDK, nor is it >> >> compiled >> >> into the PythonQt DLLs, only the generated wrappers are. >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> Florian >> >> >> >> >> >> Am 10.03.2011 09:05, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Julien ! >> >>> >> >>> ? Thanks for taking the time to answer. I have yet another question on >> >>> the same subject. Could you guys comment on the license used in >> >>> pythonqt: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://github.com/commontk/PythonQt/blob/patched/generator/abstractmetabuilder.cpp >> >>> >> >>> ... >> >>> ** This file is part of the Qt Script Generator project on Qt Labs. >> >>> ** >> >>> ** $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$ >> >>> ** No Commercial Usage >> >>> ** This file contains pre-release code and may not be distributed. >> >>> ** You may use this file in accordance with the terms and conditions >> >>> ** contained in the Technology Preview License Agreement accompanying >> >>> ** this package. >> >>> ... >> >>> >> >>> ? As far as I know PythonQt is already used in MevisLab, which is a >> >>> commercial product. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks again, >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Julien Finet >> >>> ?wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi Mathieu, >> >>>> You're right, it's an apache license, the commit has been reverted. >> >>>> Thanks for the notification, >> >>>> Julien. >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre >> >>>> ?wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Hi, >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ?CTK is released under an *apache* license, right ? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> https://github.com/commontk/CTK/commit/8ae20909af8742ee174caee6dc667e17a6697f83#LICENSE >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Mathieu >> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>>> Ctk-developers mailing list >> >>>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org >> >>>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Florian Link >> >> Chief Software Architect MeVisLab >> >> >> >> Tel.: +49-421-22495 52 >> >> Fax: ?+49-421-22495 11 >> >> www.mevis.de >> >> >> >> MeVis Medical Solutions AG >> >> Universitaetsallee 29 >> >> 28359 Bremen >> >> Germany >> >> >> >> Trade Registry: Bremen HRB 23791 >> >> VAT ID: DE250659412 >> >> >> >> Executive Board: Carl J.G. Evertsz, Ph.D. (Chairman& ?CEO), Robert >> >> Hannemann >> >> Ph.D., Thomas E. Tynes >> >> Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Ph.D. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Mathieu >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Ctk-developers mailing list >> > Ctk-developers at commontk.org >> > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> ============================== >> Stephen R. Aylward, Ph.D. >> Director of Medical Imaging Research >> Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office >> http://www.kitware.com >> stephen.aylward (Skype) >> (919) 969-6990 x300 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ctk-developers mailing list >> Ctk-developers at commontk.org >> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > > -- ============================== Stephen R. Aylward, Ph.D. Director of Medical Imaging Research Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office http://www.kitware.com stephen.aylward (Skype) (919) 969-6990 x300 From zxdflyer at 163.com Mon Mar 21 01:38:30 2011 From: zxdflyer at 163.com (=?UTF-8?Q?zhang=C2=A0xiaodong?=) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:38:30 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Ctk-developers] Problem in building ctk Message-ID: <11ad074f.2002.12ed61038ac.Coremail.zxdflyer@163.com> Dear CTK hackers: Recently I download the ctk source and compiled it with VS2008 X64 in Win7 X64 system. It works very well in my machine. Then I use some of the ctk dll,for example CTKDICOMCore.dll as the third party library that is refered by my application. It also works well in my machine. However when I deploy my application to the other computers which does not install VS2008, it just does not work. Judging from the error message, I think it may lose some dll files. So I use dependency walker to check if any dll is missing. But I am confused by the result. It shows the MSVCR90D.dll which is refered by CTKDICOMCore.dll is missing. But the CTKDICOMCore.dll is the release version. I also checked the dll files in the CTKbuild releasedirectory and got the same result. Then I copied the manifest file and according dlls to the my applicaiton dirand it worked. Why does it refer the debug version of MSVCR90D.dll ? Is there something wrong when I built CTK? Anyone could help me? Thanks very much. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julien.finet at kitware.com Mon Mar 21 04:02:55 2011 From: julien.finet at kitware.com (Julien Finet) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:02:55 -0400 Subject: [Ctk-developers] Problem in building ctk In-Reply-To: <11ad074f.2002.12ed61038ac.Coremail.zxdflyer@163.com> References: <11ad074f.2002.12ed61038ac.Coremail.zxdflyer@163.com> Message-ID: Hi Zhang, I'm glad to hear that you manage to compile and use CTK. I would be curious (probably off mailing list) to hear what you use CTK for. Concerning your DLL issue, I just compiled CTK from scratch on Win7 x64 using VS 2008 (not x64), with just Core, Widgets, DICOM/Core and DICOM/Widgets turned on, and it seems to link the dll with MSVCR90.DLL and not MSVCR90D.DLL. Can you try a build from scratch? Are you sure you selected Release in the build mode in Visual Studio (default is Debug). How come you managed to use the dependency walker on 64b DLLs, it's not supposed to work. What Qt were you using ? did you compile the binaries yourself ? Julien. On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 9:38 PM, zhang xiaodong wrote: > Dear CTK hackers: > Recently I download the ctk source and compiled it with VS2008 X64 in > Win7 X64 system. It works very well in my machine. > Then I use some of the ctk dll,for example CTKDICOMCore.dll as the third > party library that is refered by my application. It also > works well in my machine. However when I deploy my application to the > other computers which does not install VS2008, it just > does not work. Judging from the error message, I think it may lose some dll > files. So I use dependency walker to check if any dll > is missing. But I am confused by the result. It shows the MSVCR90D.dll > which is refered by CTKDICOMCore.dll is missing. But the > CTKDICOMCore.dll is the release version. I also checked the dll files in > the CTKbuild releasedirectory and got the same result. > Then I copied the manifest file and according dlls to the my applicaiton > dirand it worked. > > Why does it refer the debug version of MSVCR90D.dll ? Is there something > wrong when I built CTK? Anyone could help me? > Thanks very much. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ctk-developers mailing list > Ctk-developers at commontk.org > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: