Re: Lua License

["Nick Trout" <nick@...>]

Reuben:
> > So you have to be careful which libraries you use if you want to issue a
BSD
> > or Lua license. You cant issue a BSD license if you have used GPL code.
But
> > you can issue a GPL or LGPL license if you use BSD or Lua code.
> You're muddying the waters. You can't relicense code that already has a
> licence. On the other hand, you can license your own code however you like
> (including relicensing it or offering it under different licences, like
> Perl).

The confusing part is whether the licenses have an affect on each other and if
you have mixed code in a distribution, eg. what happens if I bind a GNU
library to Lua and distribute it? I assume using any GPL code forces your
entire project, and any derivative public. But anyway I thats quite enough of
that.

> It's worth noticing that even the GNU project doesn't think much (in some
> quarters) of the LGPL any more, and to me it seems a failed compromise:
> you should either use the GPL (if you're a purist that way), or the BSD
> license (if you're a purist that way). Anything else is just asking for
> people not to use your stuff because the position isn't clear, and using
> the GPL is asking for commercially-minded folks not to use your stuff
> because they don't understand it, or want to make proprietary changes.

I think you're right and I think the BSD/MIT license is the one to go with.
LGPL confuses the hell out of me.

Vincent:
>> So if I take the wrong pill, I'm trapped inside the huge imaginary Gnu.
>That's a strange way to look at it :)

How do you think the gnu feels?! Too much technical information rots your
brain! Need some beer to regenerate my grey matter.

Regards,
Nick