Ive seen a lot of discussion around commercial usage. Id suggest that the board first make a decision on commercial usage goals/desires before a license is picked.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Maciej Jagiello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <sharpos-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 10:07 PM Subject: Re: [SharpOS Developers] Lurkers and actives alike: Licensing? > Note: this is just my opinion, don't base your understandings of OSS > licensing > on mine and please point out my errors. > > The original BSD license is incompatible with GPL so we couldn't include > GPL > covered code. The revised BSD license does not have the advertising > clause, > which eliminates the problem, but is ambiguous (confuses with original > BSD), > which leads us to X11/MIT which is almost the same thing and pretty OK. > IMHO these are a bit too permissive, providing an easy way to let the > code be > used in closed projects without any retribution, let me make an example. > > A small company decides to use a component of the project for their > embedded platform, for example a fully managed OpenGL implementation , > extended it a little to make it more attractive than open version. > During a few years > the company made some non-standard extensions, the market absorbed the new > product easily, but those new extensions were never made public, thus > hard to > reproduce by the community and other small companies. > From the other side making the open technology available for commercial > applications makes it possible for such small companies to make a stand > in the > already locked-in market. > > A solution would be using a more restrictive license which requires code > retribution. > > MPL with provision in section 13 of the MPL exercised. Which means we > allow > the code to be used under GPL as well. So if I understand well: > if we combine our MPL code with some GPL code, the whole is treated like > GPLed, unless you use just part covered by MPL, right? > > GPL is too complicated to provide linkable interfaces and tends to repel > potential > commercial contributors (drivers and commercial applications developers). > > MPL seems a good compromise for undecided folks like myself. > > I haven't seen LGPL well, thus can't say none on this one. > > CU, now, I'm going to code a bit, not #OS tho~. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > SharpOS-Developers mailing list > SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ SharpOS-Developers mailing list SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
