Re: Using GPL for LibGTop with an exception for the GNOME Project

[Kevin Atkinson <kevinatk home com>]

Eric Kidd wrote:
> 
> There's nothing wrong with putting a library under the GPL, but it *does*
> prevent some of us from using it in free software. At my day job, I write
> code with an MIT-style license (similar to that of XFree86), and I lack the
> influence to change the license.
> 
> The package in question is a multithreaded, high-performance mail server
> which I'm porting to Linux. One of the server's features isn't available
> under Linux--it has built-in monitoring of processor load, free disk space
> and other server statistics. I was considering using LibGTop to implement
> this feature, but this won't be possible if LibGTop is GPL'd instead of
> LGPL'd.
> 
> So here are two problems with using the GPL instead of the LGPL:
> 
>  * Another free software project will either loose a feature or waste time
>    rewriting half of LibGTop.
>  * I won't be able to convince my boss to let me port LibGTop to strange
>    (and currently unsupported) Unix systems.
> 
> Now, I don't much care (my boss will either accept that this feature is
> missing on Linux, or pay me to implement it), and LibGTop *is* your
> library. So I won't tell you it's wrong to use the GPL, but I want you to
> understand all the consequences. ;-)
> 

For the very reason stated above I am strongly against putting any
libraries under the GPL as the GPL not inly limits commercial
applications from using it but it also limits other free projects from
using it that are not compatible with the GPL.

Keep it under LGPL unless you *really* want to _only_ allow GPL programs
to use it.  Other free but non-GPL programs won't be able to use it.
-- 
Kevin Atkinson
kevinatk@home.com
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/