william humphrey wrote:
I was wondering. We can release a compiled version of a program written with RunRev and Valentina database as "freeware" with the "share alike license" but what about opening up the code under a license that allows improvements and asks for those improvements back? All this would take is distributing an unlocked RunRev stack and a Valentina database and then telling the downloaders they have to go buy their copy of RunRev and their own copy of Valentina to use it?
That's pretty much how the MC IDE project works. It's just a bunch of stacks - to use it requires Rev. So the MC IDE stacks are open source, allowing some dozen+ people to have lent a hand over the years, provided of course they have a licensed Rev install to do so.
What is the best license to use in this case?
There are many FOSS licenses to choose from, each with its own set of tradeoffs.
For the MC IDE project we chose the X11 license because it provides some of the simplest definitions of the commercial derivative use it allows, with no downstream (what some call "viral") requirements for those works.
-- Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal _______________________________________________________ Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
