Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Chris Travers
Just a few minor points :-) On 8/19/07, Christopher Murtagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday 19 August 2007 04:48:55 Chris Travers wrote: > > On 8/18/07, Christopher Murtagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Saturday 18 August 2007 13:47:32 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > As a core member

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Chris Travers
Hi all; Why I favor a wait and see approach: I have thought long an hard about this. I went through a point where I thought it might actually be best for us to move to the LGPL. However, after reading both the LGPL v2.1 and the GPL v3 I do not believe that this solves our problem. In short, I

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Josh Berkus
On Saturday 18 August 2007 10:47, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together. > I don't subscribe to the ideology present within it nor do I drink RMS > brand kool aid. Says the man who owns the GPL-licensed ODBCng driver for PostgreSQL? -- --

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread John Hasler
John Locke wrote: > I don't know enough about v3 to make an informed decision, so we're > sticking to v2 for the time being. It's presently under v2 or any later version. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Elmwood, WI USA - T

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Decibel!
On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 11:26:34AM -0700, John Locke wrote: > As a commercial company, I prefer releasing code under the GPL instead > of the LGPL (or the Apache or the BSD licenses, etc), simply because it > prevents competitors from taking my code, extending it, and > commercializing it without d

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Christopher Murtagh
On Sunday 19 August 2007 04:48:55 Chris Travers wrote: > On 8/18/07, Christopher Murtagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 18 August 2007 13:47:32 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together. > > > > Fortunately IMO, we're not able to

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Chris Travers
On 8/18/07, Christopher Murtagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 18 August 2007 13:47:32 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together. > > Fortunately IMO, we're not able to do so without a total re-write of the > software. On the oth

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] GPL v3? Other license options?

2007-08-19 Thread Chris Travers
On 8/18/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hello, > > As a core member, if it were up to me, we would ditch GPL all together. > I don't subscribe to the ideology present within it nor do I drink RMS > brand kool aid. The more I h