linuxaudio.org

--0016e6d284ee4d5ba504b1bd253f

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Harry has a good point. If Dave had solicited opinions on it, I wouldn't

have dreamed of asking! I'd just assume you chose GPL for your reasons and

that they should be respected. =)
Iain
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Harry van Haaren wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:38 PM, David Robillard  wrote:

quoted text
>

>> It never hurts to ask ;)

>>

>

> Yes I suppose your right. I'll note though, that I'd concider myself

> hesitant to request an author of GPL software to re-license as LGPL. Its

> basically asking "mind if *I* earn money from *your* work?", and that's not

> something that I'd like to promote.

>

> On the other hand, a LGPL library that would allow easy usage of threads,

> ringbuffers, etc would definatly benefit the project I'm doing.

>

> Somewhere on the GNU site I read a pretty good paragraph on "choosing the

> right license", and basically it comes down to this:

> if there's a commercial version of library X available, and an LGPL

> alternative of X appears, it will promote the use of open libraries, and

> hopefully the use of the library will improve it.

> If an GPL version appears, it will be used in open-source software, but

> most likely never be used in commercial / closed software solutions, and

> hence its "publicity" and user-base will be smaller...

>

> (Overcame my dose of laziness:

> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html )

>

> End of the day, I think respect for the authors work is the most important

> thing, and I'd personally be slightly agitated if somebody emailed "Hey can

> I take your efforts and make money without promising anything back?" as it

> would imply that they don't want to respect the license that I'd chosen for

> the efforts I'd done.

>

> Rant over I think :) -Harry

>

--0016e6d284ee4d5ba504b1bd253f

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Harry has a good point. If Dave had solicited opinions on it, I wouldn=

't have dreamed of asking! I'd just assume you chose GPL for your r=

easons and that they should be respected. =3D)Iai=

n

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Harry van H=

aaren <harryh=

aaren@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:38 P=

M, David Robillard <d@drobilla.net> wrote:
It never hurts to ask ;)Yes I suppose your =

right. I'll note though, that I'd concider myself hesitant to reque=

st an author of GPL software to re-license as LGPL. Its basically asking &q=

uot;mind if *I* earn money from *your* work?", and that's not some=

thing that I'd like to promote.
On the other hand, a LGPL library that would allow easy usage of thread=

s, ringbuffers, etc would definatly benefit the project I'm doing.<=

br>Somewhere on the GNU site I read a pretty good paragraph on "choosi=

ng the right license", and basically it comes down to this: 
if there's a commercial version of library X available, and an LGPL alt=

ernative of X appears, it will promote the use of open libraries, and hopef=

ully the use of the library will improve it.If an GPL version appears, =

it will be used in open-source software, but most likely never be used in c=

ommercial / closed software solutions, and hence its "publicity" =

and user-base will be smaller...
(Overcame my dose of laziness: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgp=

l.html )End of the day, I think respect for the authors work is=

 the most important thing, and I'd personally be slightly agitated if s=

omebody emailed "Hey can I take your efforts and make money without pr=

omising anything back?" as it would imply that they don't want to =

respect the license that I'd chosen for the efforts I'd done.
Rant over I think :) -Harry
--0016e6d284ee4d5ba504b1bd253f--