On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 05:59:02 -0500 ferreiradaselva <[email protected]> wrote:
> >From: [email protected] > >To: ferreiradaselva <[email protected]> > > > > Hi, > > > > first, IANAL, of course. > > I don't know ZLIB license, or why you picked that instead of MIT, for > > instance. > > > > Since the whole purpose of wayland-protocols is that you take the XML > > file, run it through wayland-scanner, and include the compiled product > > of that in your program binaries, there is no intention to change or > > affect your license. Even totally closed source proprietary programs > > are just fine using anything generated by wayland-scanner from > > wayland-protocols. > > > > I also see no reason to even attempt to forbid e.g. modifications to > > the generated code or even the XML itself. > > > Both ZLIB and MIT are very similar, and with similar popularity, the > difference is that ZLIB is a bit more clear, and more permissive, > since it doesn't state that "The above copyright notice and this > permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial > portions of the Software." This statement in MIT mean that a user > making an application must state somewhere that they are using such > library under MIT. I already state in repository that Wayland is > used, but the end-user *likely* won't do that (for whatever reason). > Does the Wayland development community feel like that's a problem? In my personal opinion, it is not a problem in this case. Thanks, pq
pgp0EO0Bye6eZ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
