On Tuesday, 22 April 2014 at 01:17:46 UTC, Manu via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
If something's open source with no commercial intent, is there
good
reason not to use gpl?
Nothing in GPL prevents commercial use, and it doesn't limit your
ability to issue other licenses later. It does not limit the
author, only the user.
But you have to make sure that all patches you receive are
followed by a written statements where the ownership is
transferred to you. The patches makes it a derived work, and then
you need all the authors of that derived work to agree on an
additional license.
How hard is it to change later?
You cannot revoke GPL for released code, but you can stop
releasing new versions under GPL.
