Daniel Veditz wrote:
> Michael Hein wrote:
> >
> > I'm in the process of moving the LDAP C SDK 5.0 source code from NPL to
> > the dual MPL/GPL license. In notifying past contributors of the intention
> > of moving to the dual license I realized quickly this is more of a
> > religious issue that I had first anticipated. Can someone sum up the
> > pros/cons of the MPL/GPL dual license. Why is it good/bad etc. Is there
> > something better? Why the MPL/GPL?
>
> MPL because that's the preferred Mozilla license, specifically drafted by
> Netscape/mozilla.org to accomplish the aims of the Mozilla project that
> didn't seem covered by existing open source licenses in quite the way we
> wanted.
>
> GPL because that's the license used by a large portion of open source
> projects (e.g. Linux itself, GNOME, GIMP, and many, many small projects).
>
> dual because currently GPL and MPL code cannot be combined in the same
> project due to niggly technical details.
>
> Important because the MPL/GPL incompatibility is blocking the use of
> Mozilla/Gecko by GPL'd projects. A bummer for projects that would like to
> use Gecko rather than invent their own, a bummer for us because we aren't
> getting bug reports and fixes from those projects and aren't getting the
> additional Gecko browsershare of those users.
Pardon my ignorance of the licensing of Gecko......are you say this to
illustrate the case of Gecko not being released under the dual license thus
preventing the participation of the GPL folks or what?
>
>
> religious issue because everything about the GPL is a religious issue.
>
> -Dan Veditz
