Re: Proposed license policy

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:

> Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com> writes: 
> > Basically we don't want to declare the GNOME platform off-limits to
> > proprietary software, or even in some sense to make proprietary
> > software a second-class citizen, because the strategic cost of driving
> > away developers would be greater than the benefit of giving free apps
> > an advantage. Or at least I though this was what the GNOME community
> > had agreed to.
> > 
> 
> I'd say it's probably fine to have a distinct and clearly-marked "GPL
> devel platform." Though I'm not sure we have candidates for inclusion
> in that yet; the only GPL library is GAL, and it seems like "shared
> code between the office apps" rather than a general-purpose
> lib. (Don't mean that to be a bad thing, I just don't see how it's
> different from libgnomeui if the widgets are general-purpose widgets.)
> 

OK. I'm not sure the "GPL devel platform" concept is a good one, but I
agree we don't have any candidates for it yet. So how about we defer
making a decision on having a GPL devel platform until we have
libraries that would be candidates for inclusion in it.

 - Maciej

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers