I'll lend you this if you're in the area in the near future... http://www.amazon.co.uk/Open-Source-Licensing-Software-Intellectual/dp/0131487876/sr=1-1/qid=1164987503/ref=sr_1_1/202-8907074-8951814?ie=UTF8&s=books
On 01/12/06, Joe Simms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All > > I am having lengthy discussions with one of my clients about > Licensing, you're all jealous aren't you!!! > > They are fully aware that i am using symfony, and as it is a small > project and we have no formal contract in place, i have agreed to > release my code under the MIT license as well, purely for ease and > the lack of guarantee / warranty attached. > > They are however questioning the fact that symfony is combined with > LGPL licensed software (Propel, Creole), and that this will affect > their ability to sell the business / website in the future, as they > have been told by someone "really clever" that open source software > is BAD when it comes to this!!! > > As far as i understand, LGPL allows you to combine it with other > compatible licenses (MIT, BSD etc), add your own code and resell and > re-license as proprietary software, and even distribute as closed > source, however, if you ever make any changes to the core files > distributed under LGPL, you must make them available as LGPL. > Therefore, i cannot see how this will affect their ability to sell > the business / website in the future, just that they will have an > obligation to share any modifications made to the LGPL libraries with > the open source community. I think it is fair to say that LGPL is > more there to protect the open source project from being hijacked by > some big multinational and making everyone pay for it, other than > that its a pretty flexible license i think, or is it!!!! > > Has anyone had issues like this before, or can someone point to some > resource i can show my clients, or anything that will help me bring > this damn issue to an end. > > I think that as symfony bundles these projects by default, it should > explain this more clearly, as initially i thought the entire > framework was MIT, including third party libs, but obviously that is > not the case as Propel and Creole are LGPL. This should be made > clearer IMHO. Also if the plugin policy is MIT only, then technically > Propel could never be an official plugin, ouch!!! > > I think Propel were considering releasing 2.0 as MIT, and i asked the > project lead for Doctrine if they would release as MIT, but not too > sure they liked the idea as it lacks protection. Having had this > conversation with my client, it has become a bit of an issue for me, > and i think that as symfony is becoming a player in the framework > arena it may be able to request that these libraries be released > under MIT for official integration with 1.0, but that maybe pushing > our luck and not possible. > > Ultimately i think it is fair to say that a clean MIT licence > throughout would be desirable. > > Thanks in advance . > > Joe > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
