ghaerr / agg-2.6 Goto Github PK

The README.md states the following:
"AGG 2.6, along with the official Sourceforge AGG project, is based off of AGG 2.4, which is dual licensed by either a Modified BSD License, or an Anti-Grain Geometry Public License. These licenses allow for free use in commercial software.

There exists an AGG 2.5 that was created with a GNU GPL License, with no other changes from 2.4. The AGG 2.5 version is not included here nor in the Sourceforge repositories.

There remains a separate license for the General Polygon Clipper (GPC) code, which is free only in non-commercial software. However, GPC is not an obligatory part of AGG and can be easily removed."

However, it looks like one source file in the repo is actually taken from AGG 2.5 and covered by the GNU GPL. agg-src/src/platform/sdl2/agg_platform_support.cpp contains the following header:
// Anti-Grain Geometry (AGG) - Version 2.5
// A high quality rendering engine for C++
// Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Maxim Shemanarev
// Copyright (C) 2004 Mauricio Piacentini (SDL Support)
// Contact: [email protected]
// [email protected]
// http://antigrain.com
//
// AGG is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
// modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
// as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
// of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

Can that file be somehow converted to Modified BSD License / Anti-Grain Geometry Public License to make the licensing consistent and uniform across the entire repo (with the exception of the aforementioned General Polygon Clipper (GPC) code)?

Use Github Pages publish documentation and website directly from github itself. You just need a separate branch for that.

First of all: thanks for maintaining (?) a version of this awesome library,

Just to be sure tho: Since this work is based on the 2.4 version it is licensed under a BSD License, right ?
If so, is there any way to make this a bit more clear in this repository by any chance ?

Some infos from who knows

https://vector-agg-general.narkive.com/1wMI33Jj/r-i-p-maxim-shemanarev
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.graphics.agg/5732 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20160630024427/http://comments.gmane.org:80/gmane.comp.graphics.agg/5732

Compiling the code with clang's -Wimplicit-fallthrough reveals ~5 cases where fallthroughs are not explicitly marked (example). Are these bugs where break should have been used or are they intentional? If they are intentional, can they be marked with [[fallthrough]]?