>> > Going with MPL only is IMHO a bad idea. > > MPL is the pragmatic choice. Chriss is a much bigger stakeholder here > than me though.
To be clear - since its a double quote - thats not my quote. :) > "Users" are _not_ "coerced" to contribute back. _Developers_ are. So > if you are just using the software, it's as if the software was free, > but if you are making changes and distributing the software with your > changes, then the license applies. You do know that the GPL does not > apply if you don't distribute the code to third-parties? Sorry that I wasnt clear - in my context users should be interpreted as developers. I meant users of the source code. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ SharpOS-Developers mailing list SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
