[forge-dev] Forge License

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

Just to complete this license discussion: raw GPLv2 doesn't work for a plugin based system if you wish 
to allow for non-opensource plugins (which could be very useful for certain type of plugins)

See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins for more.

/max
  
/max

On May 27, 2012, at 15:25 , Thomas Frühbeck 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