Hi all, I do not bother about licences much but:
> > NAnt works well as a GPL'd project. It's effectively a stand-alone > > project. Any company wanting to incorporate it could simply bundle > > the executable. > > You cannot write a NAnt task that uses parts of NAnt's API and > distribute that task under a license other than GPL (think of > Subversion or NUnit distributing a NAnt task for example). Same for a > GUI sitting on top of NAnt or IDE plugins or ... > > If you use NAnt's API, you are creating a derived work. > > > I don't see how a GPL'd .NET build project would scare people away > > more than a GPL'd C++ compiler. > > Using NAnt is no problem (as using gcc or Emacs), extending NAnt would > be. Very true. I use my own tasks and patches now. Hope it is completely ok, unless I distribute them. I don't so I'm happy. But I think, linking exception _should_ be accepted. Downloading new Subversion version from their site including NAnt plugin should be great! Anyway - GPL+linking exception or Apache or BSD seems the same for me. Maybe we should rather use GPL (because project begins as GPL) and maybe add second licence (dual licence scheme). I see (and use) some projects with GPL+MPL dual licence. Martin btw: bundle nunit, nunit2 and nunitreport tasks with nunit rather than nant itself is good idea, I think! ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
