Look like our serial lib license issue are going to be solved. RXTX guys are thinking about moving from LGPL a double license (LGPL/ASL).
Julien
--- Begin Message ---Hi All, I have been waiting a day for things to cool down. Licensing appears to be a hot-button topic. I have no objection to dual license the interfaces as both Apache and LGPL. Some thoughts: Goal: developers wish to work together on a common piece of code that the team needs. It makes sense that the code base they work on should be Apache-licensed. That makes it possible for the team to use and develop common code, even if the end result is LGPL'd as a whole. If we combine licenses, we must follow the terms of both licenses when distributing the combined work. Thus, the dual license contains the super set of terms in the licenses of Apached and LGPL. This should address concern about using Apache-licensed code within LGPL projects due to the FSF's claim that they are incompatible. Here is a draft statement for RXSL: The RXTX Specification Library (RXSL) uses a dual license strategy for the source code. These licenses are the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and the Apache License. I strongly encourage users to use the LGPL license and participate fully in the free software community. Dual licensing of the RXSL source code provides open and free access to the technology both for the GPL community and for other developers or companies that cannot use the GPL. Dual license is common practice in open source projects like OpenOffice, Perl and Mozilla. Through the combined use of LGPL and Apache license, developers will have a high degree of freedom yet compatibility and interoperability will be preserved. You can freely modify, extend, and improve the RXSL source code. The only question is whether or not you must provide the source code and contribute modifications to the community. The GNU and Apache licenses allow different ranges of flexibility in this regard, but in the end, regardless of the license used, any and all incompatible changes must be published openly. Note that there is the RXTX Reference Model that uses the org.rxtx package, which itself is protected by the LGPL. This may be part of the distribution, however, it can not be redistributed using a different license. Is everybody OK with this? Thanks Trent, great idea! - Doug _______________________________________________ Rxtx mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.qbang.org/mailman/listinfo/rxtx
--- End Message ---
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
