nanogui: Re: Stupid licensing thread (Was: Request for comments - Microwindows)
Subject:
RE: Stupid licensing thread (Was: Request for comments - Microwindows)
From:
Greg Haerr ####@####.####
Date:
5 Oct 1999 00:32:46 -0000
Message-Id: <01BF0E96.32F58E20.greg@censoft.com>
On Monday, October 04, 1999 4:51 PM, Vidar Hokstad ####@####.#### wrote:
: the near future I and another developer will be working
: nearly full time on it, and we also sponsor another company to port a major
: software product to NanoGUI.
:
: This is code that we contribute back.
Correct me if I'm wrong: If we license LGPL _or_ MPL,
it is not required to contribute any code back.
If the _contributors_ to NanoGUI
: regards prefer a restrictive licensing scheme over those contributions,
: then fine. In that case we'll spend our time and money improving
: another product instead, or license a closed source product instead of
: spending or time and money on supporting an open source project.
So we need a license that:
1) must
or 2) should
cause contributors to contribute code back. Which?
