On Tue Jul 1, 2025 at 1:35 AM CEST, Greg Hellings wrote: > I think this sentiment from Peter is the crux of why people in this > community don't want to use a more permissive license. Most of us don't > want our work on scripture, scripture access, and the surrounding utilities > to be turned into a commercial application. That's exactly what Copyleft > licenses try to ensure. This isn't the case of a compression library, or an > encryption algorithm which, while good, is just a too. Most of us view this > as far more than that, and we do not want to see it turned into a way to > restrict access to scripture. So I don't think the more permissive option > is going to go very far.
Which is why I was suggesting LGPL (2.1 preferably) or MPL 2.0. Nobody would steal YOUR work, only that THEY could use it. Best, Matěj -- http://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, @mc...@en.osm.town GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 No matter what happens in the kitchen, never apologize. -- Julia Child
E09FEF25D96484AC.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
