> hey thibault,
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:11:42PM +0200, Thibault Genessay wrote:
>
>>The problem is that the GPL states that any *interface* must be
>>provided. Hence the XML schema or any other well-defined method would
>>imply making the specs themselves GPL'd, and thus we did not solve
>>anything. (But I might be wrong on that topic).
>
>
> i guess that's a little tricky. from my experience, though, if the schema
> definition already existed, or was seperately released and developed,
> you wouldn't be breaking any licenses merely providing compatibility
> with said definitions.
>
Think client-server exchange. Webbrowsers wouldn't have to be GPL'd even
if Apache was. This is basically the same thing.
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:34:11PM +0200, Thibault Genessay wrote:
>
>>>What about the most simple solution: get a proper license from Ethan.
>>>The GPL is the default license, Ethan can give you a custom license if
>>>he wants to.
>>>
>>
>>Why not after all ... But I doubt Ethan would allow such a license just
>>for me (and actually I see no reason why I could do something the others
>>cannot). Anyway I think that it would be an improvement to open a few of
>>the specs. of Nagios through the use of an LGPL shared lib.
>
>
> i can't speak for anyone but myself... but if someone came along to me
> wanting an alternate license for a gpl'd project of mine, there's a
> chance i could be persuaded to do so if there were some personal
> incentive
>
Money, money, money. It's so foney (?). It's a hackers world.
--
Andreas Ericsson [email protected]
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Lead Developer
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]