=RiCo= wrote:
> On 4/16/08, Paul Gideon Dann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Isaac Dupree wrote:
>> > advantage of "copyleft" license like GPL is that contributors who
>> > contribute their changes *must* be releasing them under GPL so we don't
>> > need to worry/ask about whether they agreed to the license (I think?)
>> >
>>
>> Yes, I think contributing a patch kind of implies that they're releasing
>> it under GPL if the main work is GPL, or ISC if the main work is ISC. I
>> don't think copyleft has any bearing on this. However, it seems to me
>> that the problem being discussed is more to do with *changing* the
>> licence. Because the author of any original work automatically owns the
>> copyright (unless he explicitly assigns it to someone else), they need
>> to give concent if the licence is to be changed.
>>
>>
>> Paul Gideon Dann
>>
>
> in my opinion GPL type licenses are in fact not free, as u are not
> free to sell software that uses GPL licenced software. LGPL is more
> free as only the LGPL licensed software needs to be made freely
> available.
Everyone decides for its own code, but generally speaking I agree with
rico on this point, even if I'm not really into the development of
GoboLinux.
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
