License
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Maciej Piechotka
May 31, 2008, 10:20:06 AM5/31/08
to merb_global
Some time ago there was proposed to relicense the code from MIT-like
license into a dual license MIT/LGPL. IANAL but do the dual license
MIT/LGPL make sense?
As far as I understend the MIT code can be used by the (L)GPL code. On
the other hand the license MIT allow to close the source (to prevent
what the LGPL would be impose as far as I understend).
Hence may be we should decide to eighter MIT or LGPL.
license into a dual license MIT/LGPL. IANAL but do the dual license
MIT/LGPL make sense?
As far as I understend the MIT code can be used by the (L)GPL code. On
the other hand the license MIT allow to close the source (to prevent
what the LGPL would be impose as far as I understend).
Hence may be we should decide to eighter MIT or LGPL.
Alex Coles
Jun 3, 2008, 7:02:34 AM6/3/08
to merb_...@googlegroups.com
Stick with MIT, since its being used by loads of Ruby libraries out there.
IANAL either. I was considering dual-licensing with the GPL (either v2
or v3), but I am not sure it brings any advantages.
Alex
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages