[OSGeo-Discuss] The importance of a project's license

Andrew Ross andrew.ross at eclipse.org
Fri Jul 27 12:49:39 PDT 2012


For what it's worth...

I eagerly read that link you provided. It represents one end of the 
spectrum for values and principles in terms of open source. I believe 
it's fair to say that end of the spectrum is fairly staunch and 
recognized by some as radical and even marginalizing.

I believe there's plenty of room in the world for people who believe 
strongly in such messages, but I do feel personally this type of dogma 
seems a bit out of date and probably no longer as necessary.

The opportunity is for projects & companies partner and work together in 
harmony. For projects that are interested, there's help available. For 
those that don't want it, that's OK too.


On 07/27/2012 10:05 AM, Landon Blake wrote:
> FYI: I release all of the code for my projects under the GPL and LGPL,
> and have no plans on switching for my projects. So the licenses aren't
> dead quite yet. :]
> I think there is a tradeoff in the licensing decision between the
> greater adoption that comes with a "weaker" license, and the stricter
> adherence to open source principles that come with a "stronger"
> license. (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html)
> I'm not making a statement about which license is better for OSGeo
> Projects, I'm just making a general statement. I personally feel the
> principles in the GPL and LGPL are more important than wider adoption
> for my projects. But I'm just a hobby programmer.
> There is one more thing to think about before changing the license on
> a project. There may be programmers that favor contributions to
> projects licensed under the GPL/LGPL, and consider a project's license
> when determining where to dedicate their resources. I know OSGeo has
> the right to change the licensing, but I believe there should be a
> very strong case for doing so. It is, to a certain extent, changing
> the rules after the game has started.
> Landon
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Mr. Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 27, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross at eclipse.org> wrote:
>>> BSD, MIT, Apache wouldn't have this issue - at the expense of not having the weak copyleft. Basically people can take the code and do what they wish with it.
>> +1
>> --
>> Puneet Kishor

More information about the Discuss mailing list