Apache and Apache 2 again* // Che
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martijn Dashorst Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:32 PM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components) I'm very
To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components)
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not
applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components)
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not
applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
license. If at some time we would like to adopt such components
: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:32 PM To:
wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components) I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
license. If at some time we
Dashorst
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:32 PM
To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components)
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not
applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
license. If at some
HOWTO: Pick an open source license
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=40946
Regards,
Erik.
Ted Roeloffzen schreef:
Hello all,
We are going to create a Wicket CMS and/or CMS Components, but we are
not sure under which license to do this. Which license would you
Hi,
My vote goes to LGPL: not as restrictive as GPL but preserves the gist
of it. :)
// Che
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ted Roeloffzen
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:13 PM
To: wicket-user
Subject: [Wicket-user]
To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] License for CMS (components)
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not
applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
license. If at some time we would like to adopt such components when
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Agreed. Apache or BSD is my vote. I'm much less likely to use anything
under the (L)GPL license. IMNSHO, that the LGPL preserves the gist of
the GPL isn't a good a thing. ;)
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter
I'm very biased against LGPL. The letter of the license is not
applicable for Java use, and LGPL is strongly at odds with Apache
license. If at some time we would like to adopt such components when
we arrive at Apache, then this will prohibit reusing any code from
this project.
I'm in favor of
10 matches
Mail list logo
