Michael Feiri wrote: > On monday, starting with revision 36622, all vital EFL components have > been configured to depend on copylefted code (eina is licensed under > LGPLv2.1). This is unfortunate, as it renders the existing BSD-style > license agreement essentially worthless. It is especially unfortunate as > the EFL seems to be unique as the only successful GUI environment under > a BSD-style license. > > I have used Evas as a component in a proof-of-concept for an embedded > project using the eCos operating system. No patches or other information > have been published yet, because the project is not yet released. But I > do expect to have patches for EFL ready upon release in order to avoid > the advertisement clause. > > Now, eCos is owned by the FSF and is licensed under the GPLv2 with a > linking exception that makes it completely non-viral. This exception is > more powerful than the LGPL, because the LGPL does require dynamic > linking or the distribution of linkable object files and additional > modification and reverse engineering rights. These obligations would > "infect" a project that would otherwise just use a non-viral GPLv2 with > linker exception. > > So I want to ask you to please consider keeping the core EFL components > and non-optional dependencies under the existing BSD-style license or > consider a non-viral copyleft like the GPLv2 with a linking exception in > oder to keep the EFL usable with eCos and similar free embedded > operating systems (FreeRTOS and RTEMS both use GPLv2 with linking > exceptions too). Dynamic linking is not an option for deeply embedded > operating systems. Often we dont even have a filesystem. > > Additionally I might mention that the BSD-style license of the EFL could > mean that the EFL might technically be the only serious option for a > free 3rd party GUI library on things like the iPhone. Dynamic linking > does seem to exist on this platform but things like forced codesigning, > bans on externally loadable code, and restrictions on reverse > engineering and modification rights make the use of copylefted code > "questionable" at best. > >
Frankly, the thought of the bsd license making it the only 'serious option for free 3rd party gui..' for use on things like the iphone, is a travesty to me. While a (l)gplv2 is pefectly acceptable to me, as far as my contributions to this project I will make it very clear right now (in case I haven't earlier), that there will come a point in time, fairly soon in fact, where I will no longer contribute much more to bsd licensed code. ____________________________________________________________ Start providing for your family by becoming a paralegal. Click Now. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nffPOAI4otLSuXflQi5Avmh3rtd12h4NfmoCLJMP0AnVjgh/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
