Hi (swish-e developers)
I'm coming in on the tail end of this thread...
which is partly in response to the question mark
I placed after my own comment that I was obliged to
make swishctl open source because of the GPL.
Firstly, I think that the GPL and LGPL are both
I am of two minds about the question.
As an independent contractor, I used swish-e to
fulfil a need for my client (a community organisation).
Both GPL and LGPL allow me to charge for this work
which is good - otherwise I would have had to use
an inferior proprietary solution....
As a contracted programmer, my client ends up owning the copyright
on swishctl (unless I explicitly contract to keep it).
But they don't have the skill base to continue development of it.
The fact that swish-e was GPL meant that my source also became GPL - so
*I* can continue to work with it.
If swish-e was LGPL then I would have no legal right to the code I just
For this reason - although it seems restrictive the GPL worked
for me in this project.
If swish-e was LGPL - then I could have written swishctl as
a closed source application and sold a licence to my client,
and possibly to others too. This is the traditional path for
software companies - and potentially more sustainable
economically (meaning I can keep working on swishctl).
Of course then I may have to struggle with my conscience
for taking the closed source path...
Anyway, thanks for a nice search engine - GPL or LGPL
I'll support you either way.
On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 10:38, Roy Tennant wrote:
> OK, if I read this right, all I need to do is to change the statement
> on the web site (which is one SSI file) and be done with it, right? And
> everyone goes home happy? If so, I may be able to escape this
> discussion without resorting to hard liquor... Let me know if you
> object, otherwise I'll assume you're ok with it. Thanks,
> On Wednesday, May 21, 2003, at 12:50 PM, David L Norris wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-05-21 at 13:08, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >> So, if LGPL give us 1000 users and GPL 999; I prefer LGPL.
> > For what it's worth that's pretty much my opinion. SWISH was LGPL and
> > all of the source code still says it's LGPL. Now that it's a library,
> > in particular, it probably should be LGPL. Only thing that really
> > states GPL is the website and the license I include on Windows (which
> > can be changed easily ;).
> > --
> > David Norris
> > http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
> > ICQ - 412039
Received on Thu May 22 01:05:08 2003