Re: Is Sun's new license compatible with the MPL?

Jimmy Cerra wrote:
> Right now, I released a project under the GPL [1], but I'm considering 
> relicensing it under a tri-license GPL/LGPL/MPL.  What are the 
> advantages of this?

The way Mozilla.org does it, is they release the code under the 
tri-license, but their binaries are released solely under the MPL. This 
lets them use "official artwork" in their binaries, but "prevents" 
others from using the official artwork - some might argue that this is 
allowed with the GPL as well, seeing as they are static, non-linked 
content, but I'm not sure about that.

That was infact quite unrelated to your question, but hey.. :)

In any case: These are the different pros of the licenses:
MPL: Allows people to take the work (and modify it if they want to) and 
sell it without providing the source code.
GPL: The source must always be available.
LGPL: Proprietary software can link against the software without 
opensourcing their application.

That's how I understand it (roughly), atleast, but IANAL.

> I'm also considering CDDL, Sun's new license [2] which is based on the 
> MPL.  Is it compatible with the MPL?  What are the advantages of using 
> the MPL verses the CDDL?

I haven't really read anything about the CDDL.

You should probably talk to Gerv or someone else, who has far more 
experience with this than me (and I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm 
wrong :D).

-- 
Vidar Braut Haarr