Thanks Vincent for this input. I'll go for GPL for now as it's that a nightmare to change afterward if, really, someone complains.
I would have gone with a license saying "You can modify and redistribute as long as the derived work is also under an open license, not necessarily GPL". Does that make sense? Does that exist? Pierre > -----Original Message----- > From: Vincent Picavet [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 5:58 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Pierre Racine > Subject: Re: [postgis-users] The first release of the PostGIS Add-ons is out! > > Hi, > Sorry for complicating things. > > Le mardi 19 novembre 2013 21:48:11, Pierre Racine a écrit : > > > 1. If it is GPL and I add it to my code them my code has to be licensed > > > undr GPL. This is problematic for most business. If I have a proprietary > > > product that I'm spent 100's of thousands of hours to develop and > > > believe that it is critical to my success, there is no way that I can > > > afford to allow GPL code into it. This is not a judgement call on the > > > correctness of this thinking. And the GPL advocates will have similar > > > arguments from their point of view. > > > > My point is that, if you want to integrate it with something more > > restrictive, it is always very easy to separate them in different files > > with a different licensing scheme mostly because PL/pgSQL is not > compiled. > > Having a script language does not exclude problems wrt to GPL, it just adds > complexity. > Python for example has made some work on the legal issues related to > having > gpl modules. At the end the conclusion was that having a "import" is just > like > having a link in a compiled language, and as a consequence triggers the GPL > terms for "contamination". > > As for Pl/PgSQL, such a legal research has not been made, so it's a grey > zone. > As doing such a work is just a boring and uninteresting job, I would say skip > this problem and choose simplicity and clarity. > > PostGIS is a widely distributed project, and do not need the GPL licence any > longer to enforce its opensource nature. I know it's also a matter of belief > and opinions may vary, but in this case, going GPL for Pl/PgSQL code is just > entering a grey area. > > If you want to keep away from that, make it simple : MIT, BSD, CC0, > whatever > is most compatible with everything. We want to simplify the life of users, > not > complicate it. > > > I'm going with GPL... > -1 for me if I may have an advice. > > I have some postgis functions here and there to contribute too, but please > make it simple ! > > Vincent _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
