POV-Ray Is Now FLOSS 121
An anonymous reader writes "Starting with version 3.7, POV-Ray is released under the AGPLv3 (or later) license and thus is Free Software according to the FSF definition. 'Free software' means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. With these freedoms, the users (both individually and collectively) control the program and what it does for them. Full source code is available, allowing users to build their own versions and for developers to incorporate portions or all of the POV-Ray source into their own software provided it is distributed under a compatible license (for example, the AGPL3 or — at their option — any later version). The POV-Ray developers also provide officially-supported binaries for selected platforms (currently only Microsoft Windows, but expected to include OS X shortly)."
Update: 11/14 21:57 GMT by U L : The previous distribution terms and source modification license.
What was the previous license (Score:2)
Re:What was the previous license (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POV-Ray#Licensing
POV-Ray 3.6 license not mentioned on GNU.org (Score:3)
Re:What was the previous license (Score:5, Informative)
One of those somewhat oddball project-specific licenses that are free-ish, in spirit; but either through some specific limitation, or just bad/old wording, inconveniently incompatible with most 'Free as in FOSS' projects.
QPL-like (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that just sound like the kind of clause that ends up in the license after a few too many hours after five and a couple of beers?
Re: (Score:2)
Or imagine the authors violated their own license by mistake :D
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe that's what happened to effect the change in license.
POV-Ray Developers: Hey, Linus, we really like your kernel. In fact, all of us have it installed on our development systems!
Linus Torvalds: Thanks, I like POV-Ray, too. I made my own derivative version a few years back, and...
POV-Ray Developers: FUCK!
Re: (Score:3)
The old license [povray.org] was open source but had restrictions on commercial use.
The old license is less permissive about commercial use:
Subject to the other terms of this license, the User is permitted to use the Software in a profit-making enterprise, provided such profit arises primarily from use of the Software and not from distribution of the Software or a work including the Software in whole or part.
Redistribution is more restricted:
This licence does not grant any right of re-distribution or use in any manner other than the above. The Company has separate license documents that apply to other uses (such as re-distribution via the internet or on CD)
GPL, Apache, all have restrictions against badness (Score:3)
The GPL licence, the Apache license, CCa, and just about anything but the WTFPL have restrictions on redistribution. Typical restrictions include:
If you distribute, you may not further restrict others from doing the same.
If you distribute binaries, you must distribute source.
If you distribute, you must acknowledge the original author.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Especially if you are an Important Customer, even big, serious, proprietary software (Like Windows) might be available for a look.(I'm not going to copy/paste them here; but Microsoft has about a zillion different levels of access embedded under the term 'Shared Source', which prov
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree with the OSI's "no true Scotsman"-style argument.
Re: What was the previous license (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: What was the previous license (Score:2)
Not at all, in fact I recall the usenet discussions regarding how to avoid just copying code. It was just a fact that they wanted to re-license under a floss license, and they wanted to migrate the code; so both were done at the same time. Some functions, it is as easy as "chinese room" coding, one person reads the old code and writes a plain English description of what it does: casts a ray along vector V, or finds normal of surface S. Another person who doesn't look at the old code writes these new functio
Re: (Score:2)
Re: What was the previous license (Score:2)
Posting from my phone is an awful way to try and teach about the legal side of reverse engineering code, or re-licensing, or any other legal topic. It can be, and is, done. It is one of the arguments made when talking about copyrights on algorithm. Hit google, find some articles about it, look for things
FLOSSy wording (Score:2)
I presume this acronym means Free License Open Source Software, since I've never heard it before.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The English language conflates two orthogonal concepts with the word "free".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Free-As-In-Libre-Software... FAILS.
The devil's dictionary: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Raytracer written in OpenCL (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The POV-Ray developers could still add an OpenCL raytracing engine, and as I understand etash's complaint, POV-Ray is becoming irrelevant by their not doing so.
Now that it's open, ANYONE can add an OpenCL rayrtacing engine, making it again (by your definition) relevant.
In fact, YOU could do it. What's the holdup? B-)
AGPL ... DOA License (Score:3, Insightful)
Nasty, nasty license. GPL used to cause lawyers to run around with the flamethrowers, then they learned all the nuances and all was well. AGPL? Now they run around with flamethrowers and nukes. As they should...
Re:AGPL ... DOA License (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Quine, Bobby.
Bobby was a cowboy. Bobby was a cracksman, a burglar, casing mankind's extended electronic nervous system, rustling data and credit in the crowded matrix, monochrome nonspace where the only stars are dense concentrations of information, and high above it all burn corporate galaxies and the cold spiral arms of military systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the fact that the output of a software program isn't copyrightable. Licenses only permit/restrict distribution, not "conveyance", so that provision is unenforceable.
[citation needed] (Score:3)
I'd like to see examples of such security risks. Gitorious [gitorious.org] is one website that uses AGPL3 code, and hosts projects such as Qt [gitorious.org] and Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup [gitorious.org]. Given its profile I'm sure Gitorious and the hosted projects would love to know too.
Re: (Score:2)
Not just lawyers. I have an absolute closed door policy on AGPL. I won't even use AGPL-licensed software for personal use. Its restrictions are the absolute antithesis of freedom in my world view.
Re: (Score:1)
I hope you don't use GPL code then either because AGPL is GPL with a loophole closed and both share the same essential view of freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use GPLv3 code if I can help it. I'll put up with GPLv2.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, it AGPL is pretty much GPL as intended for web services.
bad summary (Score:3)
We are all expected to understand what a FOSS (what the hell is the L for!?) license is, but perhaps you should explain what POV-Ray actually is?
Re:bad summary (Score:5, Informative)
Us old timers know what it is. It's a ray tracer from the early early days (it was used to render one of the covers of my books back in the mid 90s). I honestly thought it went the way of the dodo since I haven't heard about it in years.
Re: (Score:2)
Us old timers know what it is. It's a ray tracer from the early early days (it was used to render one of the covers of my books back in the mid 90s). I honestly thought it went the way of the dodo since I haven't heard about it in years.
I've run it in MS-DOS many times. Got a nice rendering of The Ringworld system, complete with background stars and shadow squares. The last time was on a Vista machine. A NEW Vista machine, I made some springs or some such thing. Haven't been back since.
Re: (Score:1)
I've run it in MS-DOS many times. Got a nice rendering of The Ringworld system, complete with background stars and shadow squares. The last time was on a Vista machine. A NEW Vista machine, I made some springs or some such thing. Haven't been back since.
Just curious -- where did your Ringworld scene code come from? I wrote one up back in the mid-90's that had what you describe. ~ Terrin
Re:bad summary (Score:5, Informative)
Very old timers remember using DKBTrace before it turned into POV-Ray. I actually called the "You Can Call Me Ray" BBS that originally hosted all of this, too. It's nice sometimes when a project like this from a completely different era is still alive and kicking.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember dialing into "You Can Call Me Ray" late at night, when long distance rates were the lowest..
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What he said
Re: (Score:2)
My first thought was that someone was open sourcing a fictional implementation of the Point of View Gun [youtube.com] from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie.
Re: (Score:3)
POV-Ray is a raytracer. Raytracing is an image rendering method that follows rays of light around a scene, keeping track of interactions with the geometry in the scene.
Re: (Score:2)
I always favored "Gratis / Libre Open Source Software", as being the most descriptive label. But GLOSS never caught on. Too bad, really. I think a tool chain with a high level of GLOSS would outshine a commercial tool chain in oh so many ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Free-Libre / Open Source Software
FLOSS yes, it should be FL/OSS
Re: (Score:2)
It's a way of making CGI (computer graphics) that actually look real. The engine calculates your light sources and then sends virtual light-rays from them to bounce of the objects in your scene and return them to the camera (the screen) The end result can be, if done right, photo-realistic. Also, the entire screen is by its very nature truly 3D. You can reposition the camera and move around the scene at will.
Here's a pretty old one: http://hof.povray.org/images/warm_up_Big.jpg [povray.org]
Someday... maybe a long way off
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a fan of unbiased rendering honestly, though Blender's Cycles is looking pretty spiffy lately.
Have a look at what luxrender can do [luxrender.net] - this is one of the unbiased ones. It's GPL, btw.
photon mapping vs ray tracing (Score:2)
What you have described is called photon mapping. I think there is some support for photon mapping in at least some version of povray (I'm not sure if it ever made it in to an official release), but in any case it's an optional feature. It is more accurate to refer to povray as a ray-tracer. In ray-tracing, you send out rays from the camera position and test them for intersection against objects in the scene. These rays can in turn spawn additional rays (for reflection and refraction), and at each hit l
Re: (Score:2)
perhaps you should explain what POV-Ray actually is?
Yeah, because google doesn't exist... Or would you like me to explain what a search engine and the internet are?
Here's a famous poster rendered with POV-Ray from space (the ISS). [povray.org]
Oh, I forgot you might not be a nerd for which this news is for. Perhaps you want me to explain what the ISS is?
Well, you see a when an aerospace engineer loves another celestial body very much they-- Fuck off, Lamer!
Re: (Score:3)
I know what they are. (for the record I don't like POV-Ray's results that I've seen - I'm a fan of unbiased renders like Lux [luxrender.net] though Blender's Cycles is looking pretty damn good as well these days)
Doesn't change the fact that it was a shitty summary.
Cool... (Score:2)
I remember rendering "ntreal" on an SGI workstation back in the '90s, it took about two days and I remember watching the individual pixels appearing and looking at all the details.
I just did it again and it took about 10 seconds and I'm like, "meh, next"
You'd think they'd have some different demos now...
Re: (Score:2)
wow (Score:1)
POV-Ray, that's a blast from the past.
Re: (Score:1)
So what do you young whippersnappers use when you have a ray to trace?
Re: (Score:2)
so... (Score:5, Funny)
It would be boss ... (Score:2)
... if it were FLOSS!
Let's do the FLOSS dance!
http://suitelife.wikia.com/wiki/Floss_Dance [wikia.com]
Youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8JPDg3DkSM [youtube.com]
Word salad (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Software that 99.9% of us will never use has been re-licensed with an even more restrictive license.
You're not familiar with the old POV-Ray license, are you?
The original license didn't let you even distribute a modified version. You had to distribute your changes as a patchset, so anyone wanting to use your version could get the official code, patch it with your changes, then compile it.* So GPLv2, despite all its restrictions, is less restrictive!
Now this is AGPLv3, not GPLv2, but the differences (A=restrictions on using it to provide a network service, v3=patent-defense and tivoisation stuff) are simpl
Re: (Score:2)
Most users won't care about the change (Score:4, Informative)
This isn't a case of a previously commercial program going open-source. It is a relatively minor licensing alteration to an existing product.
The changes may be of interest to die-hard Stallmanites, and to companies that want to make a profit from POV-Ray derivative works (assuming there are any), but to average users it's a big nothingburger.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
While the effect of the change to FLOSS is relatively minor, making the change was a major undertaking. If nothing else, it shows one way in which old free-but-not-FLOSS apps could be rewritten into FLOSS form.
And now with POV-Ray's ray tracing algorithms opened up, it will be interesting to see what other FLOSS projects like Blender can do with it. Blender already offers the use of Game Render, Cycles Render (not quite finished yet but beginning to look pretty sweet), and the old time Blender Render. Addi
My name.. (Score:2)
I've been PovRayMan since 1997 or 1998.. I don't think FLOSSMan has the same ring to it..
Re: (Score:2)
I had literally just woke up and was reading RSS feeds. Oops.