Re: [melbourne-pug] OS license requirements

2016-01-12 Thread Mike Dewhirst
Further to this, for the SharedSDS project licensing is now settled on GNU GPL v3 for the bulk of the software. API code will be GNU LGPL v3 Mike On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 at 10:43:58 AM UTC+10, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > > Cross posting again to thank everyone for responding ... > > I'm going wi

Re: [melbourne-pug] OS license requirements

2014-08-12 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Tom Evans wrote: > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Mike Dewhirst > wrote: > > Russ suggested staying within the big five and that was why I was leaning > > towards LGPL anyway. My thought was about who might be interested in > helping > > if the license is breac

Re: [melbourne-pug] OS license requirements

2014-08-12 Thread Tom Evans
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > Cross posting again to thank everyone for responding ... > > I'm going with LGPL. > > Oliver suggested I consider Mozilla Public License and part of a > stackexchange conversation goes [1] ... > >> The major difference is how MPL / LGPL licen

Re: [melbourne-pug] OS license requirements

2014-08-11 Thread Mike Dewhirst
Cross posting again to thank everyone for responding ... I'm going with LGPL. Oliver suggested I consider Mozilla Public License and part of a stackexchange conversation goes [1] ... The major difference is how MPL / LGPL licensed code must be linked into the project. MPL source code files can