nanogui: Request for comments - Microwindows
Subject:
Re: Request for comments - Microwindows
From:
Alex Holden ####@####.####
Date:
4 Oct 1999 19:55:27 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9910042028170.478-100000@hyperspace>
On 4 Oct 1999, Vidar Hokstad wrote:
> I thought we'd already agreed on the MPL as a decent common denominator,
> but I'd have no problems with dual licensing the code under both *GPL
> and MPL.
Seconded.
What would probably be the best compromise would be something along the
lines of the license I placed on the LinuxHacker.org code- basically it's
MPL, but you can at your option convert it one-way to a *GPL license.
I've just realised that David's original license is compatible with the
MPL (even though the GPL isn't), so there's no reason why we can't:
* License our new code under MPL.
* Keep David's original, public domain, license on his code.
* Provide an option to convert the code to GPL (David has said his code
can be relicensed under GPL, so that's okay).
* As David's code is gradually rewritten and replaced by new code, license
the new code under MPL.
We'd have to seperate the code which requires David's public domain
license into seperate files to the code which is under MPL though.
--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------
