On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Alan Williamson <[email protected]> wrote: > Approach us ... let us know what you want to use and we can look to grant a > specific license for your project. Railo are using OpenBD code in their > build and we have adjusted individual component licenses accordingly.
+1 what Alan said. Railo is very pleased with the arrangement (around C++ CFX support, in case anyone wasn't aware) and it's a great example of collaboration between the engines - and I suspect we'll see a lot more of that in the years ahead! If the OpenBD parser fits CFE and the license is the only obstacle, talk about re-licensing the parser... I sympathize with your view point because when I've been working at commercial organizations, use of GPL is extremely problematic. Even LGPL can be problematic in some situations. Model-Glue was LGPL but because of its code-generation architecture, that introduced some legal concerns (over intermixing LGPL code fragments with proprietary code) - as far as Adobe's legal team were concerned - and so Model-Glue shifted to the Apache so that Adobe could continue using it without legal problems. Your opinion of that will depend on how "pure" your view of open / free software is, I suspect. I admire the thought processes that created the GPL but my pragmatism favors the Apache license - given that you can't incorporate GPL code into non-GPL open source code and distribute it :( GPL is the strongest promoter of open source software and I am happy to contribute to GPL projects (I have - dating back over a decade) but when I am creating new OSS, I prefer a weaker license that places fewer constraints on consumers of that code (be they saintly users or evil corporations trying to make a buck off my innovations :) I'd rather my code be widely used, under any conditions, than worry about whether any or all changes made by third parties come back to me as patches. And if some evil corporation makes a for-profit product out of my code, then either my OSS version will survive or it won't, on its own merits. After all, if we believed that OSS couldn't compete with commercial products, there simply wouldn't be any OSS (or, at least, there wouldn't be any _successful_ OSS) - and we know that's not the case. An interesting corollary to all this: * The JMS event gateway is shipped in "open source" form with ACF. I wrote that code while I was employed by Adobe (Macromedia) as part of the Web Team (not the CF team). The Adobe (Macromedia) open source license states you can't use that code in anything that runs on something other than ColdFusion (really! read the license!). * The ActiveMQ event gateway was also written by me. I wrote it commercially for a client in San Francisco. That client decided to donate it Adobe. It ships as "open source" under the same license as the JMS event gateway. I doubt the Adobe license would get OSI approval as Open Source but it is open source (small letters). There are varying degrees of "open" :) -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN Railo Technologies, Inc. -- http://getrailo.com/ An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood -- Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List http://www.openbluedragon.org/ http://twitter.com/OpenBlueDragon official manual: http://www.openbluedragon.org/manual/ Ready2Run CFML http://www.openbluedragon.org/openbdjam/ mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
