|
FAST Protocol
< Previous Next >
Re: FAST C++ open-source contribution
Rodrick Brown / Ballista Securities
24 Mar 2008 4:25PM ET > IMHO, GPL with runtime exception is "reasonably non-viral". /Rolf
>
> > Hi Dimitry, Konstantin, everyone,
> >
> > I would recommend dual licensing the software under the GPL and any
> > other OSI-approved license that you are comfortable with and that is
> > reasonably non-viral. For the latter you may wish to consider: MPL
> > 1.1, APL 2, or perhaps simplest of all - BSD.
> >
> > Dual licensing means that users can choose under which of the two
> > licenses they wish to use the code.
> >
> > * For people who must use it under the GPL in order to achieve
> > compatibility with other software, this choice is available.
> > * For people who do not wish to be restricted by the GPL, the other
> > license is also available.
> >
> > Also, if I were you, I would not use the LGPL unless you really have
> > to, since this can lead to confusion over what the L means.
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> > alexis richardson
> >
> > CohesiveFT
Dimitry I strongly suggest you look at the BSD or Apache style licenses.
The BSD License allows proprietary commercial use, and for the software released under the license to be incorporated into proprietary commercial products. Works based on the material may even be released under a proprietary license (but still must maintain the license requirements). Some notable examples of this are the use of BSD networking code in Microsoft products,[2] and the use of numerous FreeBSD components in Mac OS X.[3] It is possible for something to be distributed with the BSD License and some other license to apply as well. This was in fact the case with very early versions of BSD itself, which included proprietary material from AT&T.
Re: FAST C++ open-source contribution
Rodrick Brown / Ballista Securities 24 Mar 2008 4:25PM ET
|
