nanogui: Thread: Licensing

> I like that.  Do you think then that GPL is the way to go in order to get source
> code for drivers back, etc, or is it too restrictive for people who want to use this
> stuff commercially?

I think GPL is right, and LGPL for the libraries. You can write commercial apps
with the code, you can't hog patches and changes to it

On Wed, 12 May 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:
> I like that.  Do you think then that GPL is the way to go in order to get source
> code for drivers back, etc, or is it too restrictive for people who want to use this
> stuff commercially?

It really wants to be allowable to link commercial code to it (window
managers, applications linked directly to the server instead of
client/server mode, etc.). That could be a problem if we aren't careful.
For example, for years the only floating point emulator available for
ARM-Linux was a binary-only module (Acorn gave the code to Russell under
NDA), which caused no end of problems due to the fact that you weren't
allowed to link it statically to the kernel, and nothing worked if you
weren't able to load the module for some reason. We don't want to end up
in the same position, but I'm not quite sure how to avoid it if we GPL
everything. Perhaps if we LGPLed the API, but not the core code?

--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------

In message ####@####.#### Alan Cox writes:
: I think GPL is right, and LGPL for the libraries. You can write
: commercial apps with the code, you can't hog patches and changes to
: it

Neither can you include code that isn't under the GPL, but which you
have no control over the licensing of.

Warner

> For example, for years the only floating point emulator available for
> ARM-Linux was a binary-only module (Acorn gave the code to Russell under
> NDA), which caused no end of problems due to the fact that you weren't
> allowed to link it statically to the kernel, and nothing worked if you
> weren't able to load the module for some reason. We don't want to end up

The problem was that someone took Acorn's bait and caused years of mayhem
by not having a free driver. Had freeing the driver been the only option
Acorn would probably have done so.

> in the same position, but I'm not quite sure how to avoid it if we GPL
> everything. Perhaps if we LGPLed the API, but not the core code?

If the client library is LGPL I don't see why people think there is a problem

On Wed, 12 May 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > in the same position, but I'm not quite sure how to avoid it if we GPL
> > everything. Perhaps if we LGPLed the API, but not the core code?
> If the client library is LGPL I don't see why people think there is a problem

The problem is that in some situations people will want to write a
proprietory application or window manager and link them directly into the
server, for reasons of memory usage or that their platform doesn't have
any inbuilt networking or multitasking support.

--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------

> The problem is that in some situations people will want to write a
> proprietory application or window manager and link them directly into the
> server, for reasons of memory usage or that their platform doesn't have
> any inbuilt networking or multitasking support.

Good point. 

The NPL falls somewhere between the BSD "please run off with my code and
hide it" and the GPL "give me everything back" lines. You have to contribute
code back to existing  modules but you can link seperate binary products
against it.

Alan

On Wed, 12 May 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> The NPL falls somewhere between the BSD "please run off with my code and
> hide it" and the GPL "give me everything back" lines. You have to contribute
> code back to existing  modules but you can link seperate binary products
> against it.

Hahaha, nice summary of BSD and GPL philosophies :) I am starting to think
that we'll have to homebrew "Yet Another License" of our own, due to the
rather unusual situation we're in...

--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------

> Hahaha, nice summary of BSD and GPL philosophies :) I am starting to think
> that we'll have to homebrew "Yet Another License" of our own, due to the
> rather unusual situation we're in...

Fortunately not. And the MPL (Mozilla public license) also has been through
a real legal body (netscape corporate legal). It works for Mozilla so far

On Wed, 12 May 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Hahaha, nice summary of BSD and GPL philosophies :) I am starting to think
> > that we'll have to homebrew "Yet Another License" of our own, due to the
> > rather unusual situation we're in...
> Fortunately not. And the MPL (Mozilla public license) also has been through
> a real legal body (netscape corporate legal). It works for Mozilla so far

That's at:
http://www.mozilla.org/NPL/MPL-1.0.txt
if others want to take a look at it.

--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------

The NPL might be the way to go, then.

On Wednesday, May 12, 1999 1:34 PM, Alan Cox ####@####.#### wrote:
> > The problem is that in some situations people will want to write a
> > proprietory application or window manager and link them directly into the
> > server, for reasons of memory usage or that their platform doesn't have
> > any inbuilt networking or multitasking support.
> 
> Good point. 
> 
> The NPL falls somewhere between the BSD "please run off with my code and
> hide it" and the GPL "give me everything back" lines. You have to contribute
> code back to existing  modules but you can link seperate binary products
> against it.
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
> 
>