Hi Lochana, On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:43 AM, lochana menikarachchi <[email protected]> wrote: > Is there any reason to distribute CDK under LGPL license?
CDK was licensed LGPL because it was based on CompChem, Jmol, and JChemPaint were LGPL. > Why not apache license? I do not remember the reasons why those tools had that license. If I had to (chance to) change the license of the CDK (which involves getting in contact with a lot of people and getting approval) is to move to BSD or MIT, not Apache... What would it add? People already can embed the CDK in proprietary software; I know the linking is always a bit unclear, but to me (personally), anything not changing the CDK classes itself, is *linking*. Why would you not choose LGPL? > Also, did you guys thought about incubating CDK as an apache project?? What would that add? I sounds to me we would get a lot more formal meeting if we would, distracting us from the work... ? My 2 cents... Egon -- E.L. Willighagen Department of Bioinformatics - BiGCaT Maastricht University (http://www.bigcat.unimaas.nl/) Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/ LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/ PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers ORCID: 0000-0001-7542-0286 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Cdk-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdk-user
