I've been following along as well. My contributions are extremely tiny and very recent as compared to others, but I'm fine with the statement as defined previously as well.
Just to inject my opinion... I write software because it's what I love doing, and it's even better working on a very fine project such as this one with other talented developers. It's also great that other people are willing to pay me to do what I love :) Whether an application is released under the (L)GPL or a less restrictive license makes little difference to me philosophically. If somebody takes code I publish and makes money off of it, good for them -- that's largely irrelevant to me. Conversely, when I'm doing work for hire, encountering (L)GPL projects does give me pause, due to what can become extra "complication", especially when it reflects on a client of mine, who relies on me to help them create a product. The FluidSynth team is doing exactly the right thing by discussing this in an intelligent, open manner, and I have no desire to assert my opinion that you should change the license. People are free to do as they will, which is the primary freedom I care about when it comes to software :) The downside is that people like myself will unfortunately not be able to makes use of the library in as many settings as I would like, consequently resulting in fewer contributions.
_______________________________________________ fluid-dev mailing list fluid-dev@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev
