My two bits on the licensing thing.
I am in favor of building an OpenTalk interpreter like an
embedded Metacard product and putting it under the
LGPL.
Then with that LGPL'd product building the OpenCard
program under the GPL and creating a well defined plugin
architecture, adding the necessary object heirarchical
messaging systems. Plugins could be commercial as they
are their own source code trees independent of the
OpenCard product and if someone wanted to create a
competing commercial product that used the OpenTalk
engine they could, because the engine is under the LGPL.
If people just wanted to add some expensive features to
the OpenCard product and weren't able to OpenSource the
extension they could via the plugin architecture. By
placing the OpenCard product under the GPL it prevents
commercial developers from stealing the OpenCard code
and giving us nothing. It doesn't stop them from selling it,
support licensing, or anything else. Developers could still
retain control over the licensing of their scripts because
those scripts are not part of the source code base and are
also their own entity, any licensing for products developed
with OpenCard are of course at the discretion of the
developer because the interpreter they are using as
their "run-time" is under the LGPL.
My two bits,
-- Michael --
