[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [location-iwg] uDig proposal - license
|
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 12:35 AM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
Well, actually I excluded ALv2 on purpose. The patent license provisions in the ALv2 may complicate the cut-and-paste into LGPLv2 - which is what I assumed you meant by "LGPL". If it's LGPLv3, then we could look more carefully.
LGPLv2.
BTW, there is no lawyerly consensus on whether cutting-and-pasting code from different licenses ever works. Reasonable people can and do disagree on that point.
To wit we always have an email authorisation trail with the steering committee for this kind of collaboration. This is more of a concern with GeoTools and its various downstream projects.
To further complicate the answer, dual-licensing the Eclipse project under the EPL+EDL(BSD) could be an interesting option. Don't forget that people within the Eclipse community may also want to pull your code into their projects. And for some consumers, the patent license provisions of the EPL (which are virtually identical to the ALv2) are important to them. Furthermore, this particular dual-licensing pattern has quite a few precedents within the Eclipse community.
Do you have examples I can check? This conversation will go better on udig-devel if I can offer a few examples of how it is done.
Our priorities are:
1) Out reach to Eclipse RCP Community
2) Check their is a mechanism in place to collaborate with GeoTools
One thing that is always difficult in these conversations, is we all get a chance to dance around not being legally qualified. This distracts a bit from what we are qualified to talk about - namely the goals we are setting and our understanding of the target developer community.
Any other direction on engaging the Eclipse RCP Community? I know this is more of a marketing / market position question.
Jody
