Re: [DNG] Licenses: was Browsers

2017-02-26 Thread Rick Moen
Quoting Hendrik Boom (hend...@topoi.pooq.com): [Re-user of LGPLed code revealing his source code or submitting very reverse-engineerable object code:] > The incorporator can do either of these things. He can also > distribute obfuscated object code. The only thing he has to permit is > linki

Re: [DNG] Licenses: was Browsers

2017-02-26 Thread Hendrik Boom
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 06:36:35PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 18:09:15 -0500 > Hendrik Boom wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:45:26PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 20:31:08 -0500, Steve wrote in message > > > <20170225203108.2838a...@mydesk.domain

Re: [DNG] Licenses: was Browsers

2017-02-26 Thread Rick Moen
Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > I use copyleft licenses when: > > 1) The work is a substantial coding effort > > And, > > 2) I see very little reason for someone to use parts of my code in >proprietary programs. You know, I do the same thing. > In theory I'd use lgpl i

[DNG] Licenses: was Browsers

2017-02-26 Thread Steve Litt
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 18:09:15 -0500 Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:45:26PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 20:31:08 -0500, Steve wrote in message > > <20170225203108.2838a...@mydesk.domain.cxm>: > > > > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:34:50 -0500 > > > Hendrik Boo