Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] JACK and licenses: a very important question
From: Sebastien Metrot (meeloo_AT_noos.fr)
Date: Sun Nov 11 2001 - 19:50:27 EET
I personally prefer the LGPL for libraries and JACK seems to be one.
But it's your code isn't it? Itsn't it up to you to choose then?
Sebastien
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Davis" <pbd_AT_Op.Net>
To: <linux-audio-dev_AT_music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 5:43 PM
Subject: [linux-audio-dev] JACK and licenses: a very important question
> friends - there is an important question to be made about the
> licensing for JACK. i suspect the answer will be simple for most of
> us, but it needs to be asked.
>
> right now, the JACK source code is released under the GPL. this would
> prohibit non-free programs from using JACK. it therefore seems more
> appropriate for me to change the license to the LGPL. a small part of
> me is resistant to that idea - i think that JACK is an amazing idea
> and i don't see why we should allow people who don't play in the free
> software arena to benefit. but this rapidly appears as an example of
> cutting off one's nose to spite one's face - if Emagic released Logic
> for Linux tomorrow, wouldn't we want them to be able to use JACK as
> well?
>
> so, are there are any arguments against using LGPL?
>
> --p
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Nov 11 2001 - 19:51:16 EET