Le 17/11/2011 23:19, Alister Hood a écrit :
Sorry, Just to clarify, when I said dual licensing I obviously meant
with a commercial license, not with LGPL.
The use of "commercial" is not appropriate as the GPL also qualifies for
it. Let's call it what it really is : closed.
-----Original Message----- From: Alister Hood Sent: Friday, 18
November 2011 11:17 a.m. To: 'qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org' Cc:
'jr.morre...@enoreth.net' Subject: Re: [Qgis-developer] QIGS GPL
-> LGPL - Tigers, Lions and
Bears Oh My!
The idea of dual licensing is that they would pay up front to use
QGIS
under a
commercial license. So it _would_ bring a positive return to the
project (a
new source of revenue). No need to hope to be repaid "someday".
Who will then sell the license ? The osgeo ? A new QGIS foundation ? Is
that their roles ? I still can't see how selling closed software or
helping a company get an advantage over one who will not take its client
as hostages is promoting the open source gis idea.
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
