Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb: > One thing I'd like to see here is the opinion of those that do most of > the code these days, guys like englebass, dj2, pfritz and raster. You > wrote lots of code already, and continue to do, what do you think > about relicensing the code under LGPL? > >
I'm not an author of one of the core libs, but since you are asking me, here is what i think about it. I personally don't like the LGPL, because IMHO it doesn't really work for applications. It sounds somewhat odd if you read the license for an application and they only talk about libraries. And I strongly believe that one should use the same license for applications and libraries. It happens often that you move some code from a lib to an app and vice versa, or you turn a whole app into a library. So maybe something like MPL would be better, but afaik you get with the MPL troubles with the debian folks. Don't know how it is with the CPL. I still prefer the 3-clause BSD license, I code, because it is fun. If some makes money with my code, it doesn't change the fact that i had fun while writing it and he also doesn't steal my code. I still have my code! Besides that believing that a company contributes to your LGPLed library/application because it uses/modifies your code is wrong. Take a look on the khtml history and you'll see that using the lgpl doesn't implicate or ensure that you'll receive useful patches. At the end, this decision is not up to me. Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
