incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: OO/LO License
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2011 00:20:47 GMT
That is true. There is also the possibility that there are
a set, possibly large, of knowledgeable developers who only
want their work non-copyleft. And another set that really couldn't
care one way or another. That's simply the nature of FOSS licenses.

I develop and release code under all types of licenses; I work on
GPL projects, EPL projects and AL projects, etc... For me, it is
not a religious or idealogical constraint ("I will only work on...").
Instead, as it should be, the choice of license is dictated on
many points. For the kind of stuff which is mostly important to
me, which is that the software be as ubiquitous as possible, the
AL is the perfect choice.

On Jun 4, 2011, at 6:54 PM, Ian Lynch wrote:

> Agreed. The main problem is if say the majority of knowledgeable developers
> only want their work licensed copyleft.
> On 4 Jun 2011 23:50, "Andrew Rist" <> wrote:
> On 6/4/2011 11:58 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> Just to un-muddy the waters a little, it shoul...
> The code was used under multiple licenses.  While it may be true that LGPL
> was the only Open Source license, it was not in fact the only license.
> The choice of ALv2 going forward would ensure continuity for all
> constituencies under a single well accepted open source license, with all
> parties on equal footing.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: gene...

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message