Right now, I released a project under the GPL [1], but I'm considering relicensing it under a tri-license GPL/LGPL/MPL. What are the advantages of this?
The way Mozilla.org does it, is they release the code under the tri-license, but their binaries are released solely under the MPL. This lets them use "official artwork" in their binaries, but "prevents" others from using the official artwork - some might argue that this is allowed with the GPL as well, seeing as they are static, non-linked content, but I'm not sure about that.
That was infact quite unrelated to your question, but hey.. :)
In any case: These are the different pros of the licenses:
MPL: Allows people to take the work (and modify it if they want to) and sell it without providing the source code.
GPL: The source must always be available.
LGPL: Proprietary software can link against the software without opensourcing their application.
That's how I understand it (roughly), atleast, but IANAL.
I'm also considering CDDL, Sun's new license [2] which is based on the MPL. Is it compatible with the MPL? What are the advantages of using the MPL verses the CDDL?
I haven't really read anything about the CDDL.
You should probably talk to Gerv or someone else, who has far more experience with this than me (and I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm wrong :D).
-- Vidar Braut Haarr _______________________________________________ mozilla-license mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-license
