On 03.08.2015 18:57, monkeynut wrote: > From what I understand I can keep the original networkx version of > this service and also develop a graph-tool version, the former staying > with a BSD license and the latter having a GPL license. > However, one of my friends said that many would see that as "cheating" > but it seems to be an intentional provision of the GPLv3 as far as I > understand. > > How would you view that scenario? Would you be OK with it or would you > be upset/feel violated? Would your position change if I couldn't keep > up maintaining both versions?
There is nothing for me to feel violated about if you follow the terms of the license. If you develop a piece of software that does not use graph-tool in any way, there is absolutely no claim I can make. If you decide to make a version that uses graph-tool, it needs to follow the GPL. It is really very simple. It seems like a headache to develop two versions of your platform. To do so only in order to avoid the GPL seems really strange, in my opinion. I know it is annoying to think about licensing, but think a bit about this decision: You're going through the trouble of developing two alternative versions of your code, just so that someone down the line can avoid the terms of the GPL, i.e. turn it into proprietary code. Why would you do that? But it is up to you, of course. Best, Tiago -- Tiago de Paula Peixoto <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ graph-tool mailing list [email protected] http://lists.skewed.de/mailman/listinfo/graph-tool
