ok. enough of the squabbling. e is not a political football. license is not a reason one way or another for success or failure if licenses are oss anyway. we're squabbling about strawberry vs chocolate.
here's how it will go: 1. existing libs. the LGPL crowd - RESPECT the licenses already used. deal with it. the original authors chose the licenses. don't like it? go somewhere else. this is what pretty much every oss project will say - except for very small ones. 2. new libs. he who writes and licenses the lib initially makes the license call. if its LGPL or BSD - doesn't matter. but RESPECT their choice. just like they need to RESPECT the choices of existing libs and stop trying to change them. 3. new apps. same as libs - choose your license. BEWARE of GPL though. you CANNOT take the GPL code and put it into an LGPL lib - so if you see code going from app back to a lib sometime... think many times before GPL. licence the APP under LGPL - it'd be effectively the same. 4. linking TO LGPL libs is ok - we do it already anyway. 5. linking to GPL libs - be WARY. very. this makes your lib GPL and then any app using that lib GPL. beware of the chain of "infection". if you want it a core lib used by everyone - chances are this is a very bad idea. i'm a little tired of the divisive political debating here. this is NOT a technical argument. it id not something u can win by benchmarking, numbers and proof. it's all emotions, speculation and politics. please take your politics elsewhere as this is the one thing that is really going to destroy this community if anything. i know i am personally ->||<- this far from saying "fuck it - i'm out. if this is becoming a political playground i have better things to do that deal with it". now. make your choices. but enough of the politics. debate is healthy - technical debate. direction for features and code and technical stuff. we can always debate. its good. politics is nothing more than a way to divide and create little power encampments "us" and "them". i have been very quiet - i was hoping people would sort their difference out quietly, but it seems i need to say something. i think i have been very reasonable here and have tried to accommodate BOTH sides. i see the arguments for LGPL etc. and i know why. i respect the desire for it - and when it is appropriate and sane/possible - if the author(s) want to use it, do so. by the same token respect the licenses there already. if 1 author for a project says "no - i wont relicence" or 1 authors alone simply never responds, it doesnt get relicenced. in fact the debate and effort spent relicencing is a big waste of time. so again - there are 2 valid sides to this. respect EACHOTHER. thanks. :) now... do we have productive stuff to do? -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
