Re: The license question
- From: Peter Nugent <Peter Nugent Sun COM>
- To: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad cs toronto edu>
- Cc: GNOME Locale mailing list <locale-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: The license question
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 17:37:48 +0100
ok , so does this mean LGPL is the preferred or most likely choice or is
still up for discussion ?
Behdad Esfahbod ha scritto:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Peter Nugent wrote:
yes LGPL is fine with us although we have a preference for CDDL
(OpenSolaris and other Sun tools are released under this).
Would it be possible to do this under CDDL ?
Guess no. We're too restricted by other conditions. Most
important one is that as it's becoming more and more clear,
there's a lot that needs to be done to be able to use CLDR data,
so we are definitely going to borrow data from other projects.
So essentially it's not quite like we choose the license...
Roozbeh Pournader ha scritto:
From what Keith Packard told me on the IRC, it seems that the license
question is a very important one.
We will limit our users if we do it in LGPL, the most important one
being Qt. They don't do dependencies on LGPL libraries, it seems.
The only choice would be a BSD- or MIT-like license, if we are thinking
of future expansion, which would require us to code lots of stuff from
I would say I would go for the LGPL, to be able to use already existing
code, specially since we may not be able to win the Qt guys anyway,
since they already have a locale system in place. Doing it in LGPL would
make it somehow a refactoring project, while doing it in BSD/MIT would
be a huge rewriting of everything from scratch.
Question from Sun guys: You don't have objections with the license, do
locale-list mailing list
locale-list gnome org
] [Thread Prev