On 11/15/2012 11:24 AM, Kalle Raiskila wrote: > Pocl was started as a MIT-only project, and I jumped in mid-stream, so > it is not for me to go and change policies. Is there a legal reason why > MIT-only is chosen? (And why e.g. Free Beer is frowned upon ;)) I
It doesn't help to license pocl with a dual GPL/MIT license if one wants to use GPL-only code as a part of pocl. Due to GPL "copyleft", pocl would then need to be force-licensed to GPL due to the need to use GPL-parts, as GPL is not MIT-compatible. MIT/BSD is more free than GPL, that's why it was chosen for pocl. The other way around is OK: if the library pocl uses is GPL/BSD/MIT dual-licensed we just use the MIT/BSD license instead of GPL when using the lib in pocl, no need to change the pocl license. -- Pekka ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov _______________________________________________ pocl-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pocl-devel
