On Saturday 05 September 2009 03:05:44 pm Konrad Wojas wrote: > On Sep 5, 1:24 pm, Peter Bienstman <[email protected]> wrote: > > What I don't know is e.g. if you would rut Mnemosyne together as a > > component of a bigger site like Chinesepod, e.g.. Would the Affero > > licence then require all of the Chinesepod code to become publicly > > available? I don't want to go that far. > > I think it would.
OK, then the Affero licence does not seem to be what we want here. > But I think website developers would also stay away > from the current GPL code if it would be integrated into site and not > just available on a separate URL. In the case of Mnemosyne you > probably want to have integration in order to add value. > > If you want to stimulate people to use the code for websites and other > application, make libmnemosyne LGPL and the GUI frontends GPL. Don't > make the license even more restrictive, it will not foster innovation > and it's not that hard to reimplement the algorithm. Is there anything in these licenses that would require 3rd parties to mention explicitly on their site that they are using Mnemosyne technology? I would not be happy with someone making a flashy new site, incorporating Mnemosyne in it, and then taking all the credit. Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" 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/mnemosyne-proj-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
