> True, that's a good reason, although I suppose there will also exist > "applications" in the regular sense? Or maybe not, I'm aware of the > service-based architecture of Étoilé but I'll have to read the project > page more in depth.
Yes, there will be applications, although I think we're looking at them as less frequently occurring than they do now in traditional desktops. > I have read it. I understood it. As normal given my rather fixed views > on the licensing subject, I don't completely agree. It's a good > document, the points are well made, but in the end this is a bit of a > rehash of the age-long debate about BSDL and GPL. The same points put > forward in the Licensing Philosophy could be applied to any software > project in existence given that in general any application could be > used to make a framework. I understand the component-architecture > being proposed but such a strong support for the BSD license as being > "ideal" doesn't take into account that the additional requirements of > the GPL in terms of applications aren't something that most developers > consider a burden but a desired effect of the licensing. Again, this > is merely a personal opinion, I know I'm a minority in every aspect > here and I'm confortable with that, but since the topic is being > discussed I just wanted to give my opinion. Yep. I appreciate the points of the GPL as well, and understand that many authors choose it due to the very fact that it's a copyleft and provides better legal insurance for the community. I have no problems with that -- I'm certainly not a license-zealot, for any camp. That said, it does pose limitations for code combination, which was the only reason I proposed the license structure I did. Given that both Nicolas and Quentin have suggested LGPL as an acceptable license, I've amended our license requirements to read: - All new code should be under the modified BSD, LGPL or more permissive license (X11/MIT, ISC, public domain...). - All existing code should be attempted to be relicensed to LGPL, BSD or more a permissive license, with the author's permission. - Any new contributions to existing projects should be under the same license as the project, or a more permissive license. - Any ports or forks from existing work should be under the license of the original project, and should not be GPL if there is a more permissively-licensed alternative. GPL code may be entered into the project, but should be sufficiently isolated from other code (ie: via separation of the code to a service or helper application). If anyone has any problems with that, please let me know. > As I said I'm willing to relicense the little I have done if it's > needed, and I agree with your sentiment. I just find the reasons often > mentioned not a particularity of Étoilé but an extension of each > person opinion on the GPL vs. BSDL merits and advantages. This extends > to my position as well. Makes sense -- and like I said, keeping your work as is is perfectly fine, as long as you would be willing to help work through any legal tangles we find ourselves encountering. J. _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
