On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Vince O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 19, 7:14 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Would anyone be bothered if he just categorized it into one of three >> categories: Open Source, Free (as in Beer), Costs Money. > > Sounds good to me. Nobody really understands all the difference > between all the various Open Source licences (or why so many different > ones are needed), so the extra information is no good to them. > > For them as do need to know the licence specifics, they're much better > off going to the product page anyway.
Again: while I would not claim to know all the differences, the distinction between the major ones (GPL, LGPL, BSD, Apache, Eclipse, maybe Mozilla) is relevant for me. The "GPL or not" question is relevant for anyone who considers using a product in a commercial context as well as those who work on non-GPLed OpenSource code. On the other side of the fence you find this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html -- telling you e.g. that you can't use Apache v2 licensed code on your GPL2 project. It basically comes down to understanding which licenses are suitable for your project(s). If you consider using OpenSource libaries you really should know that and thus should be able to quickly decide if a library might be for you based on this little bit of information. Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
