Re: Licence issues

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On February 24, 2004 10:42, Marcos Dione wrote:
>     I think the stock answer is: LGPL or a double licencing, like qt
> does. those are the simple choices. or you can try to build a new
> license, but try to avoid the errors made by xfree or apache. maybe you
> can also read the slashdot articles and comments and draw your own
> conclusions.

I think that the dual licencing (à la Qt) is better than the LGPL if
you want something back from your code.  With dual licencing, you
either get an application back or at least some money.  With the LGPL,
someone user your lib on a commercial product and you don't get
anything back.

Given two comparable libraries, I will alway tend to support the one
that enforce the free software spirit the most (GPL > LGPL > BSD).  If
Cygnus can make money with GPL code, why can't you too ?  How would
closing your sources help you ?  If you go the GPL way, yes, you have
your source open but you can use much more code that you won't have to
develop in-house.  Your application will cost you less to develop.

  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html

Modelling is that kind of framework that is clever enough for you to say
that you prefer to open your sources and use Modelling instead of
closing your source and code it from scratch.

If that matter, my vote it to keep it GPL, it deserve it.

- -- 
Yannick Gingras                              "The best writing is rewriting."
Coder for OBB : Overhead Brownish-orange Bivouac        -- Elwyn Brooks White
http://OpenBeatBox.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAPKheZJ8/OobqizMRAlmKAKCu6QvKvQN02E4aMknmCif87CYTlACcDWIT
ZXy+sOQMnqq3DP5R4glPUS0=
=dJj+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id56&alloc_id438&op=click