Hi FreeRDP developers,
It has been in our plans for a while now to change the current licensing of
FreeRDP to something more permissive. We are currently using GPLv2 for
everything, which is not necessarily a good thing, especially when it comes
to the libraries. LGPL could be a choice, but I am not convinced.
I looked at the various popular permissive software licenses and one that
stood out was the Apache License 2.0:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html
The Apache Software Foundation is quite big and is also quite active. There
is a good amount of good open source projects using the license. Also, it is
a license that Google particularly likes for its own open source software.
It is compatible with a lot of licenses, including GPLv3. One small problem
that can be worked around though with ASL is that it is not compatible with
GPLv2. This means that anything under GPLv2 that would use FreeRDP
librairies under ASL would need to upgrade to GPLv3. It's a bit annoying,
but not too bad, since there aren't that many projects that would be
affected by such a change. Besides our UIs (if we keep them GPL'ed), Remmina
would be affected, but I asked Vic and he seems open to the idea.
The Apache Software License would increase our compatibility with crypto
libraries which often have compatibility problems with GPL. Also, if we have
our librairies in ASL, we would allow non-GPL versions of FreeRDP to be made
for potential distribution in GPL-unfriendly environments such as Apple's
App Store. Personally, I think it's just sad that google applications like
VLC have been removed from the App Store because developers themselves made
a complaint. People have strong disagreements in what to do in such cases,
but the end result is still a desolating mess and I'd rather clear such
potential issues before they happens. I'm not saying we're about to get into
such issues any time soon, but since a license change doesn't happen very
often we might as well resolve this issue now.
Another reason for switching to a permissive license would be to make
FreeRDP more attractive for people with commercial interests. We already
have companies using the software in thin clients, and it's ok this way, but
I'd rather get rid of the GPL chilling effect to get more people involved.
Also, we can't ignore the fact that we're providing an open source
implementation of a Microsoft specification, and that Microsoft owns the
patents on it but promises not to sue people that use it. In my mind, that
pretty much makes a lot of the extra protection from the GPL worth not that
much after all.
I would like to make this license change for FreeRDP 0.9, if possible. I
went quickly over the names in the headers of the source code, there isn't
that much left from rdesktop, so most people that need to be ask for their
consent should be on freerdp-devel. Besides Vic, I have also talked with
Jay, and he is also open to the idea. To repeat what I told him: "A free
software license should help it grow, not stand in its way".
What is your opinion on this? Are there any strong disagreements, or
suggestions?
Best regards,
- Marc-Andre
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources
and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's
connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these
rules translate into the virtual world?
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb
_______________________________________________
Freerdp-devel mailing list
Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
