Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider changing to LGPL (or anything less restrictive than GPL) #12

Closed
rnavarropiris opened this issue Jun 13, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@rnavarropiris
Copy link

The GNU General Public License v3.0 imposes conditions on any software integrating a GPL license artifact which are rarely compatible with commercial software.

Switching to LGPL (GNU Lesser General Public License) would broaden the number of projects in which this library can be used.

@rnavarropiris
Copy link
Author

I really want to use this library instead of having to re-code the same by myself, but the license is impeding me to do it...

@claussni
Copy link
Member

Thanks for raising this issue. The licensing is twofold in this case. If you want to integrate or modify the source code, you need to conform to GPL. If you just want to use the binary artifact (as published on Maven Central) as is, an Apache license applies.

@claussni
Copy link
Member

Maybe I can make the conditions more clear by removing the GPL source code license. The Choose an open source license project provides a lot of useful information on that topic. I will give it some thought...

@rnavarropiris
Copy link
Author

Oh, I see.

The binary being licensed under Apache solves my issue, maybe clarifying it in the README is enough.

Thanks for the feedback! :)

@PyvesB
Copy link
Contributor

PyvesB commented Aug 29, 2019

I agree, it would definitely help to clarify and/or switch to a less restrictive license. 👍

@claussni claussni added this to the 3.0.0 milestone Aug 29, 2019
@claussni claussni self-assigned this Aug 29, 2019
@claussni
Copy link
Member

I still want the code reuse to be GPLish. For the time being I clarified the license situation in the README.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants