On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote: > No major objections, but what additional flexibility would that provide? No > need to provide source for modifications?
BSD would mean "no need to provide source for modifications". LGPL in the context of templates seems to mean "maybe you need to provide source for just header modifications, maybe for all the code that invokes the header to instantiate those templates, consult your lawyer to be sure". > Although I've never understood distributing under multiple licenses, it > seems like that could be a candidate for this portion of the library. Thanks. I'll probably make parallel.h more libMesh-agnostic right away (in roughly the same manner as our GetPot fork), but only bother adding the new license if I actually get some feedback *after* outside use that the API is worth advertising independently. --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
