I think we can all agree on two issues: 1) the current license (GPL + exception) is OK for almost everybody 2) the current license is unclear and it is confused with pure GPL. That is limiting the adoption of web2py. This needs to be addressed,
How do people feel about the following license: GPL3 + Apache GPL3 and Apache are compatible (GPL2 and Apache are not). Apache is very similar to BSD but forces users who distribute modified versions to spell in detail the changes they make. That should be sufficient to discourage forks but not to discourage people to use it in commercial products. Massimo On Dec 17, 1:52 pm, appydev <appy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings. > > I am a new member of the community, however, I will take the dare to > give my humble opinion: > > I think that a license of type "BSD or MIT" would be beneficial for web2py. > > I think the GPL license, frighten off the business and other potential > users. Some do not understand the exception and others did not read it. > > Do not get me wrong, I love Free Software, moreover, are said to permissive > licenses given the total freedom. > > I think that a license of type "permissive" favor the growth of the > community web2py and I think we should > not fear, because, as stated above, we take the example of > communities of Django and Ruby on Rails, two very large > communities, and very active communities that have facilitated the evolution > of free software. > > 2010/12/16 mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> > > > GPL2 creates the loophole. The AGPL closes the loophole. The GPL3 was > > supposed to incorporate language from AGPL and close the loophole but > > did not. It is not clear to me whether GPL3 closes the loophole or > > not. If it does not (like GPL2 does not). > > > I have no objection to move to GPL3. > > > Yet that does not help in clarifying the web2py license. > > > As a hypothetical question. Who here would oppose to moving to BSD or > > MIT or other more permissive license? > > > Massimo > > > On Dec 16, 2:54 pm, "Branko Vukelic" <branko.vuke...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mdipierro > > > > Sent: 12/16/10 07:56 PM > > > > To: web2py-users > > > > Subject: [web2py] Re: it case you missed it... > > > > If we were to move from GPL2 to GPL3 people would not be allowed to > > > > modify web2py running on their servers without making available the > > > > source code of their changes. I do not see any reason for requiring > > > > this. > > > > What's AGPL for then? Wasn't _AGPL_ supposed to prevent that? Anyway, I > > think GPLv3 makes i possible to use code licensed under licenses like MIT > > and BSD in a GPLv3 project, which is otherwise a bit incompatible. Or did I > > miss something? > > > > -- > > > Branko Vukelic > > > > branko.vuke...@gmx.com > > > >http://www.brankovukelic.com/http://flickr.com/photos/foxbunny > >
