OpenALada

OpenALada

[Aurele]

OpenAL (for Open Audio Library) is a software Application Program
Interface (API) to a computer's audio hardware.  OpenALada is a new Ada
binding to OpenAL.   

Check it out here: www.OpenALada.com

Aurele

Re: OpenALada

[f]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:30:20 -0800, Aurele wrote:

> OpenAL (for Open Audio Library) is a software Application Program
> Interface (API) to a computer's audio hardware.  OpenALada is a new Ada
> binding to OpenAL.   
> 
> Check it out here: www.OpenALada.com
> 
> Aurele

I'm not trying to be a prick, but whats wrong with writing or
wrapping sdl_sound bindings for ada? It's cross-platform.

Re: OpenALada

[Preben Randhol]

On 2005-01-23, f <242@fal.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:30:20 -0800, Aurele wrote:
>
>> OpenAL (for Open Audio Library) is a software Application Program
>> Interface (API) to a computer's audio hardware.  OpenALada is a new Ada
>> binding to OpenAL.   
>> 
>> Check it out here: www.OpenALada.com
>> 
>> Aurele
>
> I'm not trying to be a prick, but whats wrong with writing or
> wrapping sdl_sound bindings for ada? It's cross-platform.

What is wrong with having a binding to openal too? 

Preben

Re: OpenALada

[u_int32_t]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:17:15 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
> What is wrong with having a binding to openal too? 

Hmm, I guess I was being a prick.

Re: OpenALada

[Ludovic Brenta]

u_int32_t writes:
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:17:15 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
>> What is wrong with having a binding to openal too? 
>
> Hmm, I guess I was being a prick.

I don't like being a prick either, but what license is OpenALada being
released under?  I looked at the web site but there is no info on
that.  I won't download the sources unless I know it's legal.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: OpenALada

[Aurele]

Its Open Source!  Also check official OpenAL web site:
http://www.openal.org/platforms.html

Re: OpenALada

[Nick Roberts]

u_int32_t <u_int32_t@aol.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:17:15 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
> > What is wrong with having a binding to openal too?
> 
> Hmm, I guess I was being a prick.

Sometimes there's a thread on Usenet that literally does have me rolling on
the floor laughing. Thank you. Precious.

-- 
Nick Roberts

Re: OpenALada

[Luke A. Guest]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 06:04:10 -0800, Aurele wrote:

> Its Open Source!  Also check official OpenAL web site:
> http://www.openal.org/platforms.html

Does that mean I can adapt it for use with GNAT and use it in commercial
software?

Thanks,
Luke.

Re: OpenALada

[Stephen Leake]

"Luke A. Guest" <laguest@n_o_p_o_r_k_a_n_d_h_a_m.abyss2.demon.co.uk> writes:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 06:04:10 -0800, Aurele wrote:
> 
> > Its Open Source!  Also check official OpenAL web site:
> > http://www.openal.org/platforms.html
> 
> Does that mean I can adapt it for use with GNAT and use it in commercial
> software?

Click the link yourself, and read it! 

Hint : LGPL is compatible with just about anything.

-- 
-- Stephe

Re: OpenALada

[Luke A. Guest]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:04:28 -0800, Aurele wrote:

> I don't see why not, it is only a binding and the heart of it all is
> the actual OpenAL API (which is open source). The only thing I modified
> are the libraries OpenAL32.lib and Ailt.lib converted to work with
> linker v5 (I'm still using ObjectAda v7.1.2a).  You are better off
> using the libraries included with the OpenAL SDK (at openal.org) if
> using linker v6.

Yeah, some bindings are released under certain licenses which actually
stop the use of the library, i.e. a BSD licensed lib could have a GPL
licensed Ada binding, meaning that binding couldn't be used in a
commercial app. So yeah, it does matter and it should be specified.

> Anyway, I welcome any input and/or suggestions regarding rewording
> elements of the OpenALada web site and/or Ada source files to make this
> clearer, better or legal for everyone.

You could have a look to see if there are any differences between the
Linux OpenAL and the Win32 OpenAL (this one actually being updated by
Creative).

Luke.

Re: OpenALada

[Ludovic Brenta]

"Aurele" writes:
> I don't see why not, it is only a binding and the heart of it all is
> the actual OpenAL API (which is open source). The only thing I modified
> are the libraries OpenAL32.lib and Ailt.lib converted to work with
> linker v5 (I'm still using ObjectAda v7.1.2a).  You are better off
> using the libraries included with the OpenAL SDK (at openal.org) if
> using linker v6.
>
> Anyway, I welcome any input and/or suggestions regarding rewording
> elements of the OpenALada web site and/or Ada source files to make this
> clearer, better or legal for everyone.
>
> Thanks
> Aurele

OK, here is my input.  I assume the license you chose was the LGPL.
BTW, cascading stylesheets are much better than <font> HTML tags.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

--- openalada.html~	2005-01-23 19:15:11.000000000 +0100
+++ openalada.html	2005-01-23 19:15:11.000000000 +0100
@@ -36,6 +36,18 @@
 to OpenAL. It was implemented using Aonix's ObjectAda v7.1.2a and tested on a Creative
 SoundBlaster Live! sound card.</font></p>
 
+<p><font color="#FFC800"><strong>OpenALada</strong> is free software;
+you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU
+Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software
+Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any
+later version.</font></p>
+
+<p><font color="#FFC800">This library is distributed in the hope that
+it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied
+warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See
+the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licenses/lgpl.html">GNU Lesser General
+Public License</a> for more details.</font></p>
+
 <h3 style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 4pt"><!--mstheme--><font face="arial black, arial, helvetica"><font face="Courier New" size="5" color="#FFFFFF"><a name="What's New"><strong>What's New</strong></a></font><!--mstheme--></font></h3>
 
 <p><font color="#FFC800" face="Courier New">The following is a list of recent updates

Re: OpenALada

[Georg Bauhaus]

Luke A. Guest wrote:

> Yeah, some bindings are released under certain licenses which actually
> stop the use of the library, i.e. a BSD licensed lib could have a GPL
> licensed Ada binding, meaning that binding couldn't be used in a
> commercial app. So yeah, it does matter and it should be specified.

Just to make sure, commercial applications can very well be covered
by the GPL, the LGPL, or the GMGPL, or whatever license,
if the paying customer agrees. Some do pay for GPLed software,
and not every commercial entity can be shown to be a free rider,
as I guess you are implying here as if it were a matter of course.

Another way of using GPLed software in heavily commercial
applications is running profitable in house server software.


-- Georg

Re: OpenALada

[Jeffrey Carter]

Aurele wrote:

> I don't see why not, it is only a binding and the heart of it all is
> the actual OpenAL API (which is open source). The only thing I modified
> are the libraries OpenAL32.lib and Ailt.lib converted to work with
> linker v5 (I'm still using ObjectAda v7.1.2a).  You are better off
> using the libraries included with the OpenAL SDK (at openal.org) if
> using linker v6.

The license for the library and the license for the binding are 2 
different things. There is no "automatic" license for a binding, except 
a totally restrictive one.

Since the binding is distributed as source, you might want to distribute 
it under the GMGPL. The LGPL does not always make sense for Ada source 
code, which is why the GMGPL was invented.

In any case, you should state clearly on your web site what license is 
involved, and what platforms and compilers are supported.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"The time has come to act, and act fast. I'm leaving."
Blazing Saddles
36

Re: OpenALada

[u_int32_t]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:29:05 -0800, Aurele wrote:

> OpenALada is a new Ada binding for the OpenAL (Open Audio Library)API
> which is distributed under GNU LGPL. You can check it out here:
> www.OpenALada.com
> 
> p.s. I started a new thread because the other got cluttered. Thanks for
> the input though!

What are the advantages of using OpenAL?

Re: OpenALada

[Luke A. Guest]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:37:03 -0800, u_int32_t wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:29:05 -0800, Aurele wrote:
> 
>> OpenALada is a new Ada binding for the OpenAL (Open Audio Library)API
>> which is distributed under GNU LGPL. You can check it out here:
>> www.OpenALada.com
>> 
>> p.s. I started a new thread because the other got cluttered. Thanks for
>> the input though!
> 
> What are the advantages of using OpenAL?

Platform independent positional audio.

Luke.

Re: OpenALada

[Aurele]

I'm currently trying to interest someone on the Ada-Linux project team
in porting the OpenALada binding and its Ada demo (OpenALdemo) to
Linux.  No response yet...  If you need more info, contact me here:
Aurele.Vitali@gmail.com

Re: OpenALada

[u_int32_t]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:07:48 +0000, Luke A. Guest wrote:

> Platform independent positional audio.


Positional as in 5.1 or using 2 speakers

Re: OpenALada

[Luke A. Guest]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:33:29 -0800, u_int32_t wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:07:48 +0000, Luke A. Guest wrote:
> 
>> Platform independent positional audio.
> 
> 
> Positional as in 5.1 or using 2 speakers

I think that really depends on your setup and hardware and the hw support
in OpenAL.

Re: OpenALada

[Luke A. Guest]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 02:07:44 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> Luke A. Guest wrote:
> 
>> Yeah, some bindings are released under certain licenses which actually
>> stop the use of the library, i.e. a BSD licensed lib could have a GPL
>> licensed Ada binding, meaning that binding couldn't be used in a
>> commercial app. So yeah, it does matter and it should be specified.
> 
> Just to make sure, commercial applications can very well be covered
> by the GPL, the LGPL, or the GMGPL, or whatever license,
> if the paying customer agrees. Some do pay for GPLed software,
> and not every commercial entity can be shown to be a free rider,
> as I guess you are implying here as if it were a matter of course.

Well, I'm no lawyer but the thing that I'm interested in is being able to
build a piece of software and then sell the result in binary form.
Unfortunately, there are a quite a few libraries that I'll be binding to,
OpenAL, OpenGL (which I'm working on myself, so that'll most probably be
GMGPL), X, image libs, etc.

> Another way of using GPLed software in heavily commercial
> applications is running profitable in house server software.

Yeah, but I'm talking about selling something I have developed.

Thanks,
Luke.

Re: OpenALada

[Georg Bauhaus]

Luke A. Guest wrote:

>  the thing that I'm interested in is being able to
> build a piece of software and then sell the result in binary form.

o.K., in the case of binaries an open source license doesn't go well
with the product.


-- Georg

OpenALada

[Aurele]

OpenALada and OpenALdemo v1.1 have been updated and tested with
ObjectAda v7.2.2 and GANT v3.15p.  www.OpenALada.com