21 Jan
2003
21 Jan
'03
12:08 p.m.
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Thomas Grill wrote:
No, Krzysztof said he doesn't like the idea of putting cyclone under GPL. Generally, I think that we can change the license for the
externals,
if that is wanted, and put them under the same license as pd. What do you think ?
Hmmm, i'm not sure.
- I would like to emphasize the non-commercial aspect, so maybe charge a fee
for the unlikely case of a commercial applications.
This outrules LGPL, because commercial applications are explicitely allowed to link against the library, without fee.
- If someone makes changes/improvements to the code this should have to be a
contribution to the public code base, so that others can profit from it.
Use the GPL then. You can still charge a fee by double licensing.
GPL might not be sufficient though for forcing people to contribute to the code base.
Greetings,
Guenter