[OT] OSI Vs Food on the Table?

[Ali Helmy]

On 07/04/06, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 21:12 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> > Ali Helmy wrote:
> > > Hey mates,
> > >
> > > I know this may be a little bit off-topic, but since I am just getting
> into
> > > the world of Open Source Software (OSS) and after many, many hours of
> > > reading different licenses listed on the Open Source Initiative (OSI),
> I
> > > have really two questions to ask:
> >
> > I hope you don't inadvertently start a flame war :-)
> >
> > > A) How DO you pick which license to use for your software... I mean
> they all
> > > seem very close to each other, so personally, I'd rather use the Sun
> PL, or
> > > the Mozilla PL, or the GNU General PL... but... what should make me
> decide?
> >
> > Mostly, it depends on *you*, and what you intend for your software, and
> > who your target audience is. Only after you have identified this can
> > you start to make decisions. For me, all my software is either owned
> > by someone else, or I retain all rights, or I place it into the Public
> > Domain. I don't like any of the FSF stuff, so I don't use any of it.
> > The closest of the "open source type" licenses to one I would use is
> > the BSD style.
> >
> > > B) For those companies backing-up the OSI and distributing code under
> the
> > > public licenses... How does that work for a Software Company? I mean
> if I
> > > develop Software that I would like to share the Source Code with the
> rest of
> > > the world with so that they can understand it, learn from it, and tell
> me if
> > > there is something wrong, but still have to buy the software from me,
> and
> > > not just copy+compile it into their own apps, how does that work? I
> mean, I
> > > DO like the OSI, but even though that might make me popular with the
> lads,
> > > it won't provide food on my table...
> >
> > Well, someone here I'm sure will recommend the LGPL for that sort of
> > thing. But there is a lot of controversy, argumentation, and dispute
> > over exactly what the LGPL actually means.
> >
> > The questions you have asked are not easily answered by other people.
> > Only you can know what your goals are, and how best to achieve them.
> > After you know your own goals, then you can see if a license already
> > exists which helps you achieve them. Given what you have written,
> > I suspect that there is no existing license which exactly meets your
> > needs and is generally considered "open".
> ----
> I would probably agree that a BSD type license is best if you actually
> wish to package and sell the software but consider that if it is GPL,
> more people are likely to contribute to the code base and either way,
> you probably have to consider the issue of getting people to release
> any/all claims they may ever want to make for their code contributions.
> A GPL type license ensures that your code doesn't make it into someone
> else's program without benefit of your getting their code while a BSD
> license sort of allows them to use your code with fewer restrictions.
>
> This probably involves a lot more study than just off the cuff opinions
> on a list like this. I would probably ask some software developer doing
> something relatively similar so you can get their perspective on
> licensing.
>
> Craig
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>

Hey mates,

Thanks for the heads up, and after some thorough reading, and chatting with
some developers I think I will be using the GNU GPL for development of code
that I want to spread, and probably the GNU LGPL for commercial bits...

Thanks for the info  ideas

--
Cheers,
     A. Helmy
==================
  One Life... LIVE It
==================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20060407/728e536e/attachment-0002.html