Hello all,
glad to hear those enhancements are coming into the codebase!
Concerning the licensing, though, I'm not an expert myself regarding the differences. As I understand it, GPL means that any derivative or piece of code containing the library, should also be opensource. LGPL lessens this constraint by not implying opensource derivatives or containers, right? So LGPL should be fine to us, but what is the difference with the Apache license?
Are there any changes into TN5250j that we have (incorrectly) copyrighted?
| "Patrick Bielen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13/12/2005 08:22
|
|
Hi Kenneth,
> The reason for bringing all this up is that after two years a larger
> company has come back and is ready to discuss this licensing again.
Well anyway, congrats dude, isn't something like this you always
wanted ? I can image myself the very first days i joined the project
as a beta tester, and we streamlined it all in about 6 months to
a very productive product. Then the thoughts came up to be accepted
by a wider public soon, well dude, that is what is happening now :-)
> I would like to know your opinions on this.
Well, i think as long as we can still continue to work on the codebase,
this should be no problem... is it ? At least that is my opinion.
> The company is Help/Systems, Inc and they want to use the
> emulator part in there Robot product(s).
That's good news if you ask me, don't forget to tell them you name
should be listed in one or other way :-) Or maybe even better, they
contact the team as a group to work on it... always nice to earn
some extra cash for the work we did these last years right ? :-)
But before all this works out, we first really have to fix that bugs,
cause i had to replace the cvs version with an old one at various
production boxes here at stafa, cause of the screen freeze.
Well let's see what the other members have to say.
Best Regards,
Patrick
 has
notified the sender that this message has been received. |
