On Sat, 2 Aug 2008, dan sinclair wrote:
>> 2. What will be the reaction from developers that want BSD license? >> from what i've deduced on IRC and ML, several of this developers >> *won't* contribute to this library if it is not BSD, (please those >> developers that think that this is point is for them, confirm or deny >> this). In my opinion the current state of e developers is too small to >> actually divide it based on the license they prefer; and of course >> that argument "imposes" the license the library can be. So, the main >> question on this point is: if it is LGPL are you going to contribute >> to it? and, if it is LGPL are you going to *link" against this >> library? > > > I won't help if it's LGPL. I also won't link to it in my code as I > won't fix bugs in it. People like Cedric and Gustavo and their companies are more open minded than you. Their companies work with and on the efl. With he BSD licence, their work can be stolen. But They are sufficiently aware of the powerfulness of the efl and open minded to allow them to share code. Without that open-minded-ness, such improvements woud never have hit cvs. That library is not a big one, it's not the most powerful lib on earth. Just a data type lib. You do not want to help, well, if you don't like LGPL, why not. But not linking against it, it's completely crazy. Does that mean that you also don't link against any lgpl (or other licence that is not like BSD or MIT) lib that exist ? Vincent ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
