Hi, > I want to develop an OpenBSD specific set of libraries, implementing > it on C++ and using the LGPL or the Classpath::License licenses for my > code (both are almost identical). Well, I will be the initial owner of > my code and I can do (again, initially) anything with it, but:
It's your code. You could license it any way you please, even charging people for it, as long as it can't be considered a derivative of anyone else's work; ie, if you pull in any OpenBSD header code what grounding are you on? LGPL is a little neater than GPL because your application can dynamically link it and not become GPL'd itself (that's a debate for another mailing list though). > 1. Is there some policy on OpenBSD encouraging or discouraging the use > of C++ for OpenBSD specific applications? (several opensource projects > prefer C over any language and discourage using C++; is that the case > for OpenBSD?) Use C++ by all means. It's just another programming language. The more useful toolkits that are out there the more likely it is that developers will choose OpenBSD as their platform of choice. I've been toying with the idea of developing a simple toolkit of classes that ports to OpenBSD as well, but never got the time. > 2. OpenBSD is known as a very anti-GPL project... so, what would be > the OpenBSD position on front of some LGPL code implemented > specifically for OpenBSD? I am anti-GPL too (now), but it's your code. License it how you wish as long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights. Why choose a *GPL type license? Why not just use the BSD license if you're working with code to run on OpenBSD. On second thoughs, don't answer that. Just don't expect to see your LGPL classes included in the OpenBSD distribution (and probably not recommended by most of the devs here). Regards, Adam
