On 2/17/11 11:56 AM, Garth N. Wells wrote: > > > On 17/02/11 10:27, Harish Narayanan wrote: >> Dear FEniCS enthusiasts, >> >> I am going to reiterate a concern that I tried to bring up earlier >> regarding the copyright consent forms. Please chime in with your views. >> >> I understand the rationale behind using LGPL for core FEniCS components >> (e.g. DOLFIN and FFC). It makes sense to me that these projects could >> form a part of future (potentially proprietary) applications. The >> developers of such applications clearly have to bring in a lot of >> domain-specific knowledge. I can see why they might want to keep such >> knowledge proprietary, and I can see how moving to LGPL brings them into >> the community at least as users of FEniCS. >> >> But the same logic doesn't hold (in my mind) for FEniCS Apps. Some of >> these function reasonably well and are already capable of solving select >> domain-specific problems. Aren't they, in a sense, closer to complete, >> immediately useful applications? Given this, does it make sense that >> they too should be released under LGPL? What is then to prevent someone >> from, say, slapping a GUI on a well-functioning solver and selling it as >> a tool? >> > > I'm not sure what you're advocating. That FEniCS Apps should be GPL?
Yes, or at least be left to the developer's choice. I am not keen on past contributions to FEniCS Apps under GPL now suddenly being transferred to LGPL. Harish _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
