Re: AW: License proposal

 > The Apache license removes this ambiguity.

I haven't looked at the Apache license very closely. Can someone post 
their impressions of the license?

-shawn

Barr Bill P wrote:

> 
>  >I think so - and I personally believe its what we want: Everybody can 
> ship
> barracuda, can use its classes in closed/commercial software - but
> enhancements to the core have to be released. While the latter one is
> diffcult to ensure, at least nobody can take it and say "Look, we've got 
> this
> cool MVC Framework SHARK, and you only have to pay $1000 for it".
> 
> Not quite, and this is where the legal hairsplitting begins.
> 
> For example, if you modify a class, LGPL requires you to ship the source 
> of the modification. If you add a subclass that modifies the behavior of 
> Barracuda for your own use and leaves the rest intact, you do not have 
> to ship the source of that subclass. If you add an entirely new package, 
> you do not have to ship the source of that package.
> 
> The Apache license removes this ambiguity.
>