[Box Backup-dev] Licensing (was: Who did what?)

[Chris Wilson]

Hi Ben,

>>  I understand the problem and agree with your points. Obviously only 
>>  you know how you use your framework and it doesn't matter to us so I 
>>  won't go there. But a possible solution *may* be to make the framework 
>>  LGPL. That would allow use for and by commercial programs, but still 
>>  require changes to the framework itself be returned to the community. 
>>  This is just a suggestion, so if it's no good for any reason then no 
>>  problem.
>
> That could definitely work for me.
>
> If anyone has any objection to 0.10 going out with the existing license, 
> but to revisit this issue as part of the planning for the next version, 
> speak up now.

No objections. I'd be very happy for Box to eventually become LGPL, if you 
want to use it in closed source projects, or to GPL the application and 
LGPL the libraries.

Cheers, Chris.
-- 
_ ___ __     _
  / __/ / ,__(_)_  | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK |
/ (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer |
\ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software |