On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 20:58, Eric Merritt <[email protected]> wrote:
> For sinan it doesn't matter. The code will be include in sinan at some > point as I have to actually call the PropEr api to run the tests. The > GPL and especially the GPLv3 is much more strict about this then the > LGPL. > > I am not terrible concerned about sinan. Sinan being under the GPL > would be disappointing just from my licensing views, but it wouldn't > be viral, that is folks could use sinan without having in licensing > implications for their code. I have tried to read up on the GPLv3 and I fear that after sinan has become GPL you have to prove that your program only uses sinan though the command line API, and even that is an unclear legal area. > I am much more worried about how the > GPLv3 interacts with code in erlware_commons. Does the fact that it > uses PropEr for testing (and includes proper header files) indicate > that it too must be under the GPL? Its a big question and one we > should figure out how to get answered. > I tried to read the GPLv3 with an optimistic mind, but I think that all the test code becomes GPLv3 by virtue of calling the PropEr functions. If the test code is not part of the official release then only the test code would become GPLv3 (my interpretation). This means that if the test is made a separate project using the GPLv3 license there would be a clear cut between things and the main code could be distributed with any license. That would make it a bit of a pain to use PropEr since it would decouple the versioning between the source and the tests. There might be a last option: "dual licensing" such that the source is X and the test is GPLv3, but this is beyond the training I have received on Open Source, so we need to dig a bit deeper to find the answer. I will ask at work tomorrow and see what others think. Cheers, Torben > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Martin Logan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Can you package out as an app that can be installed separately then > > dynamically found? > > > > On Apr 5, 2011 10:03 AM, "Eric Merritt" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Guys, > >> > >> I just realized that PropEr is under GPLv3. If I include proper > >> support in sinan this is going to force sinan to be under the GPLv3, > >> in general we have leaned to much more permissive licenses in the > >> past. So this becomes a tradeoff between openness and the benefits of > >> proper. > >> > >> I worry that, because of the way erlang works I tend to think that > >> anything that uses proper, because it includes proper code must be > >> under GPLv3 as well. Though I am much less sure about that, I am no > >> copy right attorney. > >> > >> Eric > >> > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "erlware-dev" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected]. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >> http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en. > >> > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "erlware-dev" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en. > > > -- http://www.linkedin.com/in/torbenhoffmann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "erlware-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.
