FYI: I release all of the code for my projects under the GPL and LGPL, and have no plans on switching for my projects. So the licenses aren't dead quite yet. :]
I think there is a tradeoff in the licensing decision between the greater adoption that comes with a "weaker" license, and the stricter adherence to open source principles that come with a "stronger" license. (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html) I'm not making a statement about which license is better for OSGeo Projects, I'm just making a general statement. I personally feel the principles in the GPL and LGPL are more important than wider adoption for my projects. But I'm just a hobby programmer. There is one more thing to think about before changing the license on a project. There may be programmers that favor contributions to projects licensed under the GPL/LGPL, and consider a project's license when determining where to dedicate their resources. I know OSGeo has the right to change the licensing, but I believe there should be a very strong case for doing so. It is, to a certain extent, changing the rules after the game has started. Landon On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Mr. Puneet Kishor <punk.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Andrew Ross <andrew.r...@eclipse.org> wrote: > >> BSD, MIT, Apache wouldn't have this issue - at the expense of not having the >> weak copyleft. Basically people can take the code and do what they wish with >> it. > > > +1 > > > -- > Puneet Kishor > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss