Album art and APE

Discuss Max, an open source CD audio extractor and audio converter.
Post Reply
sddawson
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:25 am

Album art and APE

Post by sddawson » Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:29 am

Max is the only converter I've found so far that will let me point it at a folder of several hundred CDs ripped in APE and convert them all to another format. With XLD and even dbpoweramp on Windows you have to open each album folder in turn and select all the files manually! This would take far too long. However, Max doesn't carry forward album art in APE files (as has already been mentioned on the forum). Is there any chance this can be supported any time soon? Thanks.

sddawson
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:25 am

Re: Album art and APE

Post by sddawson » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:44 pm

Any comment, sbooth?

User avatar
sbooth
Site Admin
Posts: 2445
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:45 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Album art and APE

Post by sbooth » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:39 am

I've recently reviewed the APE license and I'm not sure that it is truly GPL compliant. I plan to remove APE support from the next version of Max, so this feature won't likely be available.

sddawson
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:25 am

Re: Album art and APE

Post by sddawson » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:02 am

Oh, that's a shame. I'll have to look elsewhere. But keep up the great work on Max!

lykose
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: Album art and APE

Post by lykose » Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:56 pm

sbooth wrote:... I plan to remove APE support from the next version of Max, so this feature won't likely be available.
very sad to hear that, sbooth. :(
taking away the option to convert ape-files with max is like taking away one wheel from a car and leave it just with 3 wheels, imho.
just my 2 cents.

User avatar
sbooth
Site Admin
Posts: 2445
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:45 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Album art and APE

Post by sbooth » Mon Dec 22, 2008 5:11 pm

The problem really lies with Matt Ashland's licensing terms (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/license.html), specifically number 2:
2. Monkey's Audio source can be included in GPL and open-source software, although Monkey's Audio itself will not be subjected to external licensing requirements or other viral source restrictions.
The "viral source restrictions" are what makes the GPL the GPL, so even though he doesn't seem to care it seems wrong to include it in violation of his terms.

javamarc
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:56 pm

Re: Album art and APE

Post by javamarc » Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:34 pm

sbooth wrote:The problem really lies with Matt Ashland's licensing terms (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/license.html), specifically number 2:
2. Monkey's Audio source can be included in GPL and open-source software, although Monkey's Audio itself will not be subjected to external licensing requirements or other viral source restrictions.
The "viral source restrictions" are what makes the GPL the GPL, so even though he doesn't seem to care it seems wrong to include it in violation of his terms.
There really is no licensing problem, only on the first look. The licenses are incompatible, but not bidirectionally. Matt Ashland cannot incorporate GPL'd code into Monkey's Audio, if he wants to stick with his license. If he wanted to do that, he would need to use a GPL compatible license for his code. But that is not automatically reciprocal!

The GPL is viral in the sense that you cannot use GPL'd code to extend your own, when you are not willing to open up your own code in the same way. In the case of Max it's the other way around. We are extending a piece of GPL'd code with Ashland's code, which is explicitly allowing that use. Max must be GPL'd to incorporate GPL'd code as some of its libs might be, but it is not prohibited to use extensions, which are not GPL'd, for your own code. After all Sbooth still holds the copyright for all of his own code within Max while generously providing it to the public under the GPL license.

Matt Ashland's term No. 2 just states that his code doesn't automatically become GPL'd when you take it to extend a GPL'd project. Else anybody could make a circuit through a GPL'd project like Max to get rid of Matt Ashland's licensing terms and then just take the code from Max' repository instead of Ashland's.

For example, the BSD extensions as FLAC also don't become GPL'd just because they were incorporated into the GPL'd Max.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests