Re: Stupid licensing thread (Was: Request for comments - Microwindows)

[David Murn]

On 4 Oct 1999, Vidar Hokstad wrote:

> >I still personally think the MPL is the only standard license that fits 
> >the linked in case at all 
> 
> I agree, but on the other hand I'd gladly support licensing the code under
> both the GPL and the MPL, so that those who wants to develop free software
> can do so and still use other GPL'd software in their programs.

IMHO, the simple/obvious answer is GPL.  If someone wants to write
commercial/closedsource programs, there's nothing at all stopping them
from writing their own library, under their own license.  I very much
dislike the thought of someone making money off any code I've written,
without giving something back to the opensource community, and I'm sure
quite a few people would agree.

As long as the API and/or messaging protocol are open spec, then anyone
can write their own library.  X is an example, XFree uses opensource
license, metrox and accelx used closed.  Same function, same result, but
they had to write their own library.

Davey