http://lwn.net/Articles/26637/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "ImageMagick v. GraphicsMagick". hourly 2 http://lwn.net/Articles/27054/rss 2003-03-27T19:36:27+00:00 proxity Very good. All files and webpages of ImageMagick are on-line again.<br> http://lwn.net/Articles/26692/rss 2003-03-25T22:50:56+00:00 bfriesen The ImageMagick license actually allows the code to be re-licensed under different terms, however the GraphicsMagick uses identical terms as ImageMagick's. Certainly any new code is copyright by its author.<p>The good news of the day is that Cristy (ImageMagick maintainer) has changed his mind and has decided to incorporate the GraphicsMagick license statement rather than backing out the incorporated changes. This will allow allow ImageMagick to copy freely from GraphicsMagick. GraphicsMagick was already able to copy freely from ImageMagick since GraphicsMagick is already dual-licensed. http://lwn.net/Articles/26684/rss 2003-03-25T22:19:08+00:00 Ross Interesting, but if GraphicsMagick is a derivative work of ImageMagick, then how can they have changed the license terms? http://lwn.net/Articles/26642/rss 2003-03-25T18:48:49+00:00 bfriesen There is no intention to start a conflict between the two groups.<br>Cristy (leader of ImageMagick Studio) recognizes that there is a problem.<br>He does not want to add the GraphicsMagick license statement to ImageMagick<br>so he has now commited to removing the updates from GraphicsMagick which<br>were commited to ImageMagick CVS and are currently present in the<br>ImageMagick 5.4.7 beta package. To the best of our knowlege, the current<br>ImageMagick 5.4.6 release does not contain any GraphicsMagick code.