Re: License Wave

Hi Michael,

GPL may do the right job for you, it totally depends
on your business model. GPL does not require you to
publish on the internet any code you may write which
is compiled against a GPL-ed library. It only requires
you to give the End User the same rights on your code
than the rights you got when started using others
GPL'ed code.

(note : there is perhaps an exception for the changes
to the librairy itself, but I never had to think about
if, because I definitly hate branching code, and it is
always a better thing to contribute back so you can
benefit from all the new features and bug fixes to the
main branch)

That is to say that when you release a software, you
are required to allow the end user to freely copy,
modify and redistribute your code.

If you are working on custom applications for one
specific type of business customers, and you don't aim
at becoming a Microsoft type software vendor (that is
write once sell everywhere), but you rather want to do
software consulting, then GPL may do the job.

Right now, I working on a luxor-based project, which
will indeed be required to be GPL. For each release, I
also send source code to the client. But that is not a
big deal since none of them does even know what the
word compilation mean, let aside the word application
server... The only thing they understand is that if I
go bankrupt or I have unreasonable business practices,
then they will be able to switch to another IT service
company to make the update and maintenance.

(Gerald, please correct me if I got something wrong)

Hopes this may help you.

Denis



--- Michael Finney <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thank you for your quick response.
> 
> Yes, I have read material at
> http://www.opensource.org/ and 
> http://www.fsf.org
> 
> The truth is that if a person is not sure whether or
> not he/she would 
> be in violation of the GNU GPL license, they he/she
> won't use the code 
> at all.
> 
> I have read the GNU license stuff more than once.
> 
> Let's examine the
> http://luxor-xul.sourceforge.net/license.html 
> together:
> 
> If I use Luxor XUL, I am creating a "work based on
> the Program".  Thus, 
> the whole application would have to be GNU.  So, I
> guess the license is 
> clear.
> 
> I should check out 
> http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/   
> (specifically
>
http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/licensing.html?cid=4
> 
>   ) ?   I wanted to make sure the URL is correct.
> 
> Thanks,
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday, April 13, 2003, at 03:32 PM, Gerald Bauer
> wrote:
> 
> > Servus Michael,
> >
> >   First, if you don't like the GNU GPL or if you
> have
> > doubts that you're in violation you can always buy
> a
> > classic commercial license.
> >
> >   Luxor follows Trolltech's Qt's licensing model.
> So
> > please, check their website for details how it all
> > works.
> > <clipped>
> 
> 
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of
> TotalView, The debugger 
> for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave
> you feeling lost and 
> disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way.
> Available on major UNIX 
> and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
> _______________________________________________
> luxor-xul-user mailing list
> [email protected]
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luxor-xul-user


=====
=========================
|Denis Cardon, Tranquil I.T. Systems 
|10 rue du Docteur Bouchard, 49400 Saumur
|Tel: +33(0)2.41.67.56.99
|Web: http://www.tranquil-it-systems.fr
=========================

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf