In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Vidar Braut Haarr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:MPL: Allows people to take the work (and modify it if they want to) and sell it without providing the source code.
Nope, you have to publish the modifications you make to MPL'ed source files and to files that contain code copied from MPL'ed source files.
Ah, I just learned something new, thanks :) Looking at the FAQ, it verifies what you said: <http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/mpl-faq.html>
It's just worth pointing out (even if perhaps implied by your above comment):
"New files containing only your code are not Modifications, and not covered by the MPL."
So if you add files to an MPL-distributed source, you do not need to provide the source to those files (unless it contains code from MPL'ed source, like you implicitly stated above).
LGPL: Proprietary software can link against the software without opensourcing their application.
LGPL is difficult to interpret--especially when applied to languages that don't use C linkage. When people think about using LGPL, it would usually be better to use MPL/GPL dual license.
I agree. Even the FSF urges people not to use LGPL, IIRC.
-- Vidar Braut Haarr _______________________________________________ mozilla-license mailing list mozilla-license@mozilla.org http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-license
