Re: Component Licensing [was Re: Questions]

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>]

On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Linas Vepstas wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 04:43:06PM -0800, George was heard to remark:
> > I think with the above rationalle for licensing I suppose then that we would
> > need to require only in-proc platform components to be LGPLed, and require
> > the out-of-proc platform components just any free software license.
> > 
> > This raises an issue.  Are 'panel applets' considered part of the 'platform'
> > and if so should in-proc ones be LGPLed.  I don't think this makes all that
> > much sense since they're mostly to use in the panel and they're not a library
> > or anything.  But they are components.
> 
> As you say, maybe this is a non-issue.  I beleive they are all currently
> GPL'ed.  Making them LGPL'ed would make it easier for somebody to create 
> a propprietary/unusual-license panel application.  And that seems rather 
> unlikely ...
> 

Leaving aside the unusual and proprietary licences for the second - and I
see a lot of reasons for people to want to write an applet licenced under
those - will I be able to write an apache licenced apache control applet
so I can control the apache running on my desktop?

> --linas
> 
> 
> -- 
> pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas linas org>
> PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933
> 

	Sander

	I see a dark sail on the horizon
	Set under a dark cloud that hides the sun
	Bring me my Broadsword and clear understanding