Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [location-iwg] uDig proposal - license

If you want to be able to move code around at the patch level, then EPL to LGPL won't work. At the component level, there are likely ways to make it work, but not cutting-and-pasting code into the middle of files, and so on.

 

The universal donor licenses are MIT and BSD.

 

From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garnett@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: October-01-12 7:18 AM
To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; Location Industry Working Group discussions
Subject: Re: [location-iwg] uDig proposal - license

 

LGPL

 

-- 

Jody Garnett

 

On Monday, 1 October 2012 at 5:19 AM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:


I know this is an incredibly dumb question, but what license is GeoTools under? (Sorry, I'm on an airplane at the moment and didn't want you to think I was ignoring the question.)

On 26/09/2012 6:40 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

A section question from udig-devel email list...

I had a question around the use of EPL (I know it is your recommended default license).

 

The story we are focused on is ability to transfer small blocks of code down into GeoTools when the occasion warrants.

- We have a history of pushing, particularly QA and testing code, closer to where the problems occur.

- I have also watched teams rapidly prototyped code in uDig (often for a customer / deadline) before transferring the technology to GeoTools in benefit from wider community testing.

 

Q: Is this story possible with EPL, or should we focus on one of the other license options?

-- 

Jody Garnett

 




_______________________________________________
location-iwg mailing list
location-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/location-iwg

 

_______________________________________________

location-iwg mailing list

 


Back to the top