Benn: This is so crazy! Let me share a situation I am dealing with now. I am contracted for organization A to create enterprise architecture. Organization B has more political clout so they force an Oracle solution (identity management) on me for one specific application suite. The Oracle solution uses it's own licence but tests their product on version 2.0.52 for Apache. We use and have accepted version 2.2.8 of Apache. This is just one of the constraints. So, now my enterprise solution, using JBoss and the LGPL (includes all these licenses) must be run on an IIS Windows server using a terminal window to start and stop JBoss. They won't buy an NT Service wrapper.
My issue as an evangelist and integrator of open source, is that the licenses cause lots of confusion. People choose them incorrectly. Or, they choose "something". Or they ignore them altogether. For CAS, I would use a GNU license and maybe the LGPL. I think at least there's strong legal intelligence behind it. And, I think that the goal is to let us write and share software to be able to communicate with computers in the most effective manner. And, by sharing what we learn, things only get better. We've already made the wheel. We should use it. I'm anxious to see what license is chosen. I'm starting a non-profit organization and some open source projects with another friend and we haven't chosen a license. We will model the organization much like Apache but somewhat custom. I've been leaning towards the GNU licenses. And, our stuff won't be an Apache product so why associate with Apache. I think the license should support the goal and I haven't hired a lawyer for this task yet. When I ultimately do loose the cash for the lawyer, I'll share anything I find with all my partners in crime. Please post here with any news. David On 11/18/08, Benn Oshrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --On November 18, 2008 8:37:16 AM -0500 Scott Battaglia > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ] We're looking at a license that provides more protection for > ] contributors and adapters. I'm not actually on the working group > ] looking into this, but I trust their judgment ;-) > > ] On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Olivier Berger > ] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ] > Just out of curiosity, what's the rationale for change from BSD to > ] > Apache2 ? > > In addition to the protection issue, there is also concern about license > alignment with other open-source higher ed oriented projects. > > One of the questions that has come up is whether or not GPL style copyleft > should be included. I'd be interested to hear if anybody has any strong > opinions for or against, off list if you prefer. > > -Benn- > _______________________________________________ > cas-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev > _______________________________________________ cas-dev mailing list [email protected] http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
