If the Posse can spend the time gathering the this one word or TLA (three-letter-acronym), then this little bit of alphabet soup can help some of us a lot.
Peter Becker wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
