Re: [gnet] Re: Licensing of gnet examples

[Tim Müller <t i m zen co uk>]

On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 22:10 -0400, David Helder wrote:

> I approve of relicensing them to the LGPL.

Thanks Mark and David, I've committed an LGPL license to all source
files in examples/ for now.

> Yes, the examples all show fairly common usage of usage of the library. 
>   I don't want their license to perceived as a barrier to writing GNet 
> apps.  I would approve of putting them in the public domain too.

IANAL, but 'public domain' is a problem for some non-US jurisdictions as
far as I know. In most European countries, the concept of 'public
domain' doesn't really exist, or a work cannot explicitly be put into
the public domain without having its copyright expire first (or
something like that). The closest thing to 'public domain' would be some
kind of BSD license I guess, but I don't think it really makes a
difference in the end given that GNet itself is LGPL anyway, or does it?

Cheers
 -Tim

> On Sep 13, 2005, at 6:42 PM, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> 
> > I am okay with re-licensing it if David is.  It's his baby.
> >
> > M
> >
> > David Hoover said on Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 02:00:13PM -0700:
> >> A coworker of mine just noticed a slight discrepancy in the licensing 
> >> of
> >> gnet:
> >>
> >> The library itself is LGPL, however the files under /examples are all
> >> GPL according to the comments at the top. It makes things a little
> >> awkward, since you can use the library without needing to GPL your own
> >> app, but you have to be a little bit wary of how closely you mimic the
> >> given example code when first starting out.
> >>
> >> It appears that David Helder and Mark Ferlatte are the only copyright
> >> holders listed in those files, so I wanted to ask if they'd be willing
> >> to relicense those files under the LGPL to help clear this situation.