I'm not aware of any compelling reason to switch to a more restrictive license. However I personally don't think it's derogatory for a project to expose which open source libraries it depends on.
Best regards, Tamas 2008/2/29, Tim Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 09:52 +0100, Milo van der Linden wrote: > > Given the fact that MpaDtoNte is commercial, it is probably not an > > alternative. :-P > > > > About using Mapserver under the hood; shameless! These guys should > > recieve punishment! > > They should be forced to donate to the mapserver project and show the > > mapserver logo everywhere. ;-) > > > <stirring the pot> > I thought mapserver was distributed under a license that specifically > and deliberately allowed this. If this is considered undesirable, > shouldn't it be released under a less permissive license? > > > Tim Bowden > > > > > > Daniel Morissette schreef: > > > Matt M wrote: > > >> Anyone know of a .NET equivalent of Mapserver? > > >> > > > > > > Plesae dnot' tlel aynnoe, but MpaDtoNet hsa MpaSreevr udern teh hood. > > > I wshi tehy wree mroe opne atuob tihs. ;) > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mapserver-users mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mapserver-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users > > _______________________________________________ > mapserver-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users > _______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
