aerique wrote:I am a couple of weeks away from releasing the first versions of three Common Lisp packages which all three provide an interface to a foreign library (a 3D engine, a physics engine and an input library).
Since I do not really know much about licenses my initial thought was to release them under the same license as the libraries they're interfacing to which are the: GNU Lesser General Public License, Zlib license and the zlib/libpng license respectively.
However I'm not really sure whether that is actually the smartest thing to do. I basically want people to be free to use my code how they like as long as credit is given where credit is due and as long as they don't misrepresent their changes to my code as being the original thing. By the looks of I'm totally free to slap on the license I want on my code, but perhaps someone can elaborate or suggest otherwise.
Jasper wrote:Affero GPL everything the GPL does but also if the users use it via a network. (Not saying it is better then GPL, just that it exists.)
Why wouldn't you want to release code into the wild? In many cases, i don't see it being negative any time soon. Sure, you don't want to represent little-tested code as being easy to use and good libraries, but why not let other people look at it if they want. (Although they probably won't look at it.) By having a project website code, you can allow people to work collaboratively with you.findinglisp wrote:So, before you start talking licenses, it's important for you to identify your philosophy and your reasons for wanting to release the code into the wild at all.
gugamilare wrote:MIT / BSD-style: this is the "do whatever you like, but don't remove the credit". This means that someone can modify your library, close the source code and put your copyright notice somewhere in the documentation of his program, saying that one piece of the code was made by you, but your code would not be there, neither modified nor unmodified.
findinglisp wrote:So, before you start talking licenses, it's important for you to identify your philosophy and your reasons for wanting to release the code into the wild at all. Once you have done that, the correct license is usually obvious.
findinglisp wrote:That said, "giving credit where credit is due" depends highly on what you mean by "credit." If you want your source code comments to be preserved, you're good to go in almost all cases. If you're looking for 36-point font attribution on the application splash screen, almost none will give you that much credit.
Jasper wrote:Why wouldn't you want to release code into the wild? In many cases, i don't see it being negative any time soon. Sure, you don't want to represent little-tested code as being easy to use and good libraries, but why not let other people look at it if they want. (Although they probably won't look at it.) By having a project website code, you can allow people to work collaboratively with you.
For libraries the GPL can indeed be too restrictive. On the other hand, that can be exactly the purpose. It has made a few projects GPL (clisp being one i know of, via readline) Same for the Affero GPL.
There is also a licensing model where you give it with GPL to everyone that wants it, and a different license to people that pay for it. Thought qt did this.(dual licensing) In that way, (Affero) GPL for libraries can make sense. Of course it can be a little harsh against small(honest) companies that want to use it. Also if you use it all contributors to the code in question including those in the past must agree. (Since they presumably licensed it to you under the GPL, since they modified your GPL code.)
aerique wrote:I basically want people to use the above-mentioned libraries from Common Lisp however they want, even closed-source commercial projects, as long as it is within the parameters set out by the original libraries without being bitten in the ass by any licensing restrictions that I might unknowingly introduce.
Good point about what is meant with "credit". The source code comments mainly, I don't need the splash screen A little copyright notice in a long list of credits as well perhaps, but if they don't need to mention Ogre they definitely don't need to mention my little effort.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests