Apparently ALv2 did not make the cut. That makes a choice of:
- BSD - this one you always customise to say which organisation is providing (so BSD style license) - EPL - acceptable with drawbacks - MIT Next up a formal email to PSC and user list, and gather together a work team to do this one. -- Jody Garnett On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 12:25 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: > Discussion on LocaitonTech has now gotten back to this question… basically > confirms what we already know. > > I had a question around the use of EPL (I know it is your recommended > > default license). > > > > The story we are focused on is ability to transfer small blocks of code > > down into GeoTools when the occasion warrants. > > - We have a history of pushing, particularly QA and testing code, closer to > > where the problems occur. > > - I have also watched teams rapidly prototyped code in uDig (often for a > > customer / deadline) before transferring the technology to GeoTools in > > benefit from wider community testing. > > > > Q: Is this story possible with EPL, or should we focus on one of the other > > license options? > A: EPL to LGPL is not possible at the patch level (can be handled at the > component jar level) > A: The "universal donor licenses" are MIT and BSD and ALv2 > > Jody
_______________________________________________ User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) http://udig.refractions.net http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
