On May 9, 8:58 am, Ed Keith <e_...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Stepping back from the political/philosophical/religious arguments, I'd like > to give some real advice based on my own perspective. > > How you license your software should be based on how you want it to be used. > > If you are releasing an end user application I do not care how you license > it. If it is useful I will use it. If you believe some of the code is of > commercial value, and that you hope to profit from it you should use the GPL, > so you can license it separately to someone who wants to use it in a closed > source product. > > If, on the other hand you are releasing a library, to be incorporated into > other products, if you release it under the GPL I will not take the time to > learn it. I do not want to have to think about what took I can legally use > for what job. Libraries with permissive licenses can be used in any project. > I can not use GPL or LGPL code in many contracts. So I do not waist my time > learning to use libraries covered by restrictive licenses. So if you want me > to even consider using your library do not use GPL, or LGPL. I favor the > Boost license in this case. Again, if you want to also offer other licenses, > for a fee, you should use GPL, I will not use it, but others might, and you > may get paid for your work. > > The bottom line is: if you want the largest possible user base, go with a > less restrictive license; If you hope to profit financially from your work, > use the GPL.
I agree completely, except for the part where you say "Stepping back from the political/philosophical/religious arguments." I've been trying to say practically the same thing, but it's apparently contentious :-) Regards, Pat -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
