[forge-dev] Forge License

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

I agree with you guys. I think we should go EPL. Need to figure out if
there are any legal problems with changing licenses, and get some folks
from Legal to give advise. I'll take care of that.

~Lincoln

On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Thomas Frühbeck <fruehbeck at aon.at> wrote:

> +1 from me too. After having a short review of the differences EPL seems
> to be the most suitable.
> IMHO any proprietary plugin built on Forge automatically fosters the
> quality of the core - the best plugin will be useless on an instable
> foundation. APL seems to be too permissive as this backlash is not
> enforced, allowing kind of "we have the stable Forge" parallel
> development. GPL V2 may be ok too but incompatible with EPL/APL, V3
> seems to be too political.
>
> If technical excellency is the primary goal, then I would go for EPL.
>
> Thomas
>
> Sent from my good old Linux 3.1.10-1.9 desktop down in the cellars where
> I am allowed to do the real stuff ;-)
>
> Am 26.05.2012 23:47, schrieb Dan Allen:
> > +1 Nice additions. I think the EPL really captures the spirit of the
> > permissive licensing for addons and copyleft for the core that should
> > allow each party to have the "freedom" (quoted due to the dual
> > meaning) they want.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20120527/4ff443eb/attachment.html