Selon anssi <[email protected]>: > Dear Joaquim, > > thanks for pointing that out. > > There´s absolutely no intention to abuse any of the great work of the > gdal/ogr developers. Rather the opposite. > > The license is being discussed as we speak and we're considering > various options. What would you suggest? Should it be MIT or would , > for example, Modified BSD License do?
Ansi, You are completely free of choosing the licence for your software. The X/MIT licence of GDAL/OGR has no consequence on the choice of the licence of other software using GDAL/OGR. You could even release your software under a proprietary licence if you wish (but, as a OSGeo project, we clearly advocate for the use and development of free and Open Source software !). It is up to you to decide which rights and obligations you want to offer/impose to your users. Licencing has been discussed in the past and you can for example have a look at this post http://dmorissette.blogspot.fr/2011/07/obligations-related-to-open-source.html for a quick summary of my understanding of some common FOSS licences. Best regards, Even _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
