[sldev] Rolling a custom viewer installer?

[Gary Wardell]

Hi Able and Rob,

Could I make a suggestion here?

How about having the end user first install the Linden build of the viewer and then installing updated/modified components/files
on top the Linden install.

Presumably if Able modified certain files they would not be restricted files and the Linden install would already be covered under
Linden's licensing.

Admittedly this would be two installs where Able wanted only one, but I think it would get around a potentially sticky issue.

Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sldev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com
> [mailto:sldev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com]On Behalf Of Rob Lanphier
> Sent: Thu, July 05, 2007 3:59 PM
> To: Able Whitman
> Cc: Second Life Developer Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [sldev] Rolling a custom viewer installer?
>
>
> Hi Able,
>
> I'm not going to be able to get you off the hook for reading and
> understanding all of the license files in order to redistribute a
> product based on them.  It puts me in dangerous territory to try to
> paraphrase them.
>
> What you have a license to redistribute depends on which
> components you
> pull in.  Most of the viewer is available under GPL.  Some components
> (e.g. Kakadu, FMOD, etc), are available under separate
> licenses, and are
> marked in the libraries distribution.  Using our trademarks
> requires you
> to follow our branding guidelines.  You'll need to read and understand
> all of the applicable licenses in order to understand what rights and
> obligations you have.
>
> Rob
>
> On 7/2/07 9:38 PM, Able Whitman wrote:
> > Wow, I feel like tonight is the Soft and Able hour... :)
> >
> > On 7/2/07, *Soft Linden* <soft at lindenlab.com
> > <mailto:soft at lindenlab.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >     This is a good one to ping Rob or the licensing SL
> alias on directly.
> >     I'm betting if you want to get Linden Lab's blessings
> on an official,
> >     sanctioned release though, you'd find you had to relicense some
> >     libraries yourself. :(
> >
> >
> > Just to clarify, I'm definitely not looking for an official
> blessing.
> > My only goal is to make it easier to package up a test build of the
> > viewer that involves more than just the viewer executable.
> >
> > If I have to distribute a Zip file of loose files and provide
> > instructions for hacking up an existing client install, that's okay.
> > But being able to roll my own installer means that people
> who want to
> > test my private build (or anyone's private build for that
> matter) can
> > have a convenient way of installing a side-by-side viewer
> so that they
> > can easily fallback to the official viewer if they so choose.
> >
> > Perhaps a compromise solution would be to distribute an installer
> > which includes all the files except for the libraries that aren't
> > redistributable? Then users could simply copy those missing
> files from
> > their existing install into the folder for the private build.
> >
> > I don't know exactly what files can and can't be
> redistributed, nor do
> > I pretend to know the particulars of the licensing issues,
> so I'll CC:
> > Rob on this as well.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
>
>