[Urwid] Urwid license
Thomas S Hatch
thatch45 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 3 13:10:55 EST 2014
I would agree here, I have seen many companies refuse to use LGPL code.
Thomas S. Hatch | Founder, CTO
5272 South College Drive, Suite 301 | Murray, UT 84123
thatch at saltstack.com | www.saltstack.com <http://saltstack.com/>
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Andreas Kloeckner
<lists at informa.tiker.net>wrote:
> Ian Ward <ian at excess.org> writes:
> > Tony Narlock has suggested switching the Urwid license to an MIT or
> > BSD license. He's raised some issues with LGPL and the difficulty of
> > interpreting it with a Python library like Urwid.
> > https://github.com/wardi/urwid/issues/41
> > I'm not opposed to the idea, but it will involve contacting quite a
> > few contributors to get their permission. If some people don't give
> > permission then we would have to consider if switching licenses was
> > worth removing their work from Urwid. i.e. this is not fun or
> > interesting work, but it might be good for the library.
> > If you have relevant information for this discussion, please add it to
> > the ticket above.
> > I contribute code to proprietary commercial, AGPL, GPL, LGPL, and
> > BSD/MIT licensed projects. I'm not interested in the politics of
> > licensing, just the practical advantages and disadvantages. I also
> > don't want to start a flame war here on our peaceful mailing list.
> FWIW, +1 for MIT/BSD-ish.
> Urwid mailing list
> Urwid at lists.excess.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Urwid