[Pkg-isocodes-devel] iso-codes licensing

[Alastair McKinstry]

I originally chose the GPL when starting the project.
I changed later to LGPL to allow people to 'link against' the code  
without releasing their code.
Any lingering references to 'GPL' are mistakes, and should be changed  
to 'LGPL'.

I'm not particularly in favour of the BSD, as I'd prefer that anyone  
that uses the code
and makes changes should release those changes - witness Microsoft  
use of the
BSD networking stack ,without making its code changes free, for example.
I think the differences between LGPL and BSD in practice are not very  
large for this project,
but people have submitted lots of patches & translations with the  
expectation of it being
a 'GPL' project - moving to LGPL was a small move, other moves  
require good explanations.

I haven't read the LPGL v3 yet; any relevant changes ?

Regards
Alastair

On 8 Sep 2007, at 18:57, Christian Perrier wrote:

>
> I'm not a very good license junkie..:-)
>
> Either BSD and GPL are fine by me. If we choose GPL, I suggest
> choosing GPL v3 if we can.
>
> I would give Alastair precedence for the licence choice, though. He is
> the person all that project.
>
>


> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-isocodes-devel mailing list
> Pkg-isocodes-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-isocodes-devel

Regards,
Alastair

-- 
Alastair McKinstry  , <alastair at scealnetworks.com>     http:// 
blog.scealnetworks.com

Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite  
world
is either a madman or an economist - Kenneth Boulter, Economist.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-isocodes-devel/attachments/20070908/c84a1ccc/attachment.htm