----- "Lester Caine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christopher Schmidt wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:40:41PM +0200, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > >> Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: > >> > >>> I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I > don't have > >>> commercial interests, > >>> but I would like the project to be sustainable. > >>> > >>> I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that > Google Code > >>> is more suitable. > >> Please note: > >> - GPL is more widely used > > > > Than what? > > > > In any case, GPL is designed to prevent use of the software in a > > specific set of contexts. I maintain my position that for > Javascript > > Libraries, the GPL is confusing at best, and tends to hurt uptake of > > > an open source project, in my experience. (ExtJS is a strong > counter > > example of a JS library which is GPL licensed -- but they are not > an > > open source project, just open source code.) > > > > The GPL is a fine license for many things, I just think that open > souce > > Javascript Libraries isn't among them. > > GPL is appropriate if you do not want other people to make money out > of your > effort. LGPL may be more appropriate for Libraries but only after > reading > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html > Surely you mean people not making money out of selling your efforts without making a contribution back? Plenty of people make money from selling services around GPL software without breaching the licence and I don't think many of those developing GPL software begrudge that.
Chris ------ Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
