On Wednesday, 25 November 2015 at 14:44:09 UTC, Wild wrote:
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 11:34:57 UTC, Piotrek wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 at 23:35:58 UTC, Wild wrote:
I have recently started working on a 64bit kernel ...
Good to see more work in the OS area. I am even more happy
there is more developers interested in GUI stuff. I have one
fundamental question though:
Is it possible for you to pick the Boost license (especially
This is my general concern for all libs developed by the D
community. IMO license other than Boost is very cumbersome and
doesn't comply with the D core libs.
Like cym13 said, there should not be any problems with the
MPLv2 is basically LGPL but at a file level and it won't
"infect" any other files.
My code can included in any close source projects.
The only thing is that if any of my files are changed, those
changes need to published.
No worries :) Feel free to use whatever license you want. It is
However my point was that the code released with license other
than Boost (or similar) cannot be included in Phobos. That's one
thing. The second is, non liberal licenses put burden on
commercial adoption and put risk on legal actions. I know that
from the employee POV who worked for many corporations and was
obliged to follow the rules.
The bottom line is that viral licenses (with varying
aggressiveness) are in opposition to business. Yes, I know GPL is
used by companies but the cost is high. To use analogy: you can
live with viruses, but you need money for medicines.
BTW. Sorry if I sounded to harsh and forgive me stealing your
announcement for my propaganda ;) I'll try to figure out a way to
present my ideas in proper way before I have to many enemies.