OgreAL and distribution

hi
i need to put some sound in and OgreAL seems the only 'fully free' solution so i'm pondering to use it.

* apart from OgreAL dll, am i wrong or the end user will need to install some OpenAL libraries?
* can i include those files in my own package or should i require the user to install the package from creative?

thanks for any input

The user would need to install the OpenAL redist package. You can either require them to do it or bundle it in, but if you take that road you need to have a good look at the EULA from Creative and make sure that everything there is on the up and up.

Wikipedia says OpenAL is licensed under LGPL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openal
If that's true, then it means if you bundle an unmodified OpenAL as a dll file for your package then you're safe (same thing with Ogre itself)

This email conversation also seems to back that up:
http://opensource.creative.com/pipermai ... 07309.html



As for libogg and libvorbis the docs say they are licensed in either GPL and BSD
http://vorbis.com/faq/#flic

I rummaged the source code and I do believe their license is the BSD Style license

I researched more on this since I was concerned myself (I plan on using OgreAL)

I downloaded a working copy of the OpenAL SVN repository and this is what a portion of the README told me:


The directories in detail:
.
.
.

* OpenAL-MacOSX: Apple's implementation of OpenAL for Mac OS X.

* OpenAL-Sample: Contains the cross-platform OpenAL sample implementation
(SI), based on former Loki efforts.

* OpenAL-Windows: Creative's Windows implementation of OpenAL.

Please check the individual directories for installation instructions.


This means the Windows version of OpenAL that we know is made by Creative (almost) from scratch, using the OpenAL sample implementation as reference.

Both the sample and Creative's implementation is licensed under LGPL.
Apple's implementation, on the other hand, is licensed under a BSD Style License.

Its funny though, that the openal website doesn't mention their license.

The last log entry in the SVN working copy that I got was dated 2007-08-23 04:03:48, so what I've been looking at could'nt be old code.

anyone, please tell me if I'm wrong

It's our company's opinion as well that the you can use it as LGPL and include the DLL's without any problem. Their website clearly indicates the license as LGPL and therefore it is not a problem.

It's our company's opinion as well that the you can use it as LGPL and include the DLL's without any problem. Their website clearly indicates the license as LGPL and therefore it is not a problem.

what company?

Just my 2 cents here with the licensing:
This you can find in the OpenAL SDK documentation:

OpenAL re-distributable license
Creative Labs, Inc. is providing you with this OpenAL32.dll installer and other OpenAL files ("Software"). You may use and freely integrate with your software applications and distribute such throughout the world at no cost or further obligation to Creative.
NO WARRANTY
blah-blah-blah

So, this means, you can freely integrate their re-dist.exe with your installer (use the -s mode to keep it silent) and you will be OK with the licensing.