Re: Lua License

[Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@...>]

> >> For practical purposes, Lua's license has the same effects of the new
BSD
> license, with extra warnings about misrepresenting. It is simple, easy to
> understand and non-invasive. On the other hand, GPL/LGPL are confuse, hard
> to understand and virotic. I doubt many people that stamp a GPL license in
> their code really understand it.
> 
> I really think you are right on the last point. I dont think a lot people
are
> fully aware of the implications of the license when it interacts with
other
> code. There are probably hundreds of breaches of licenses which people
just
> overlook. I think people equate GNU with free software, ignoring or
> misunderstanding the GPL.

I am not so sure, since the GPL and LGPL are quite commented, so the general
outline is probably understood.
It is in the details that programmers are probably confused. Like putting
[L]GPL software in DLLs or shared libraries, etc.

I agree fully with the "confuse, hard to understand and virotic" (viral?)
statement! A lot of licences needs to be:
1) native English speaking;
2) versed in the (US) laws
to fully understand them.

This can be useful to avoid twisting the meaning of these terms, to provide
a firm ground in case of trial. But most users just want to know: "Can I
include this software without releasing the source code of my application?".

> Summary of licenses :-
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html

Also: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html

> The "modified BSD" license may be the one Reuben was talking about,
otherwise
> known as the X11 or Xfree66 license:-
> http://www.x.org/terms.htm

Personaly, I chose the zlib/libpng License which is short and clear. I could
have chosen the new BSD or the MIT one, quite similar.

> The Lua license doesnt seem that bad. If just the fact that its yet
another
> license.

Suggestion: take one well known licence, and apply some restrictive clauses.
This way, users immediately know the kind of licence you use (aha, it is a
MIT one!), and the special clauses that apply to the software (oho, I can't
call "Lua" my own special derivative language).
This may not dissipate the fog about licence compatibility, but it can be an
improvement. Or not :-(

Regards.

-- 
--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--
Philippe Lhoste (Paris -- France)
Professional programmer and amateur artist
http://jove.prohosting.com/~philho/
--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--=#=--

Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net