Re: [FreePV-dev] Does LGPL limits FreePV adoption?

[Bruno P. <br...@po...>]

On Wed 05-Mar-2008 at 15:41 +0100, harghh wrote:
>
>Is the LGPL a good choice to ease adoption of FreePV and attract 
>contributors?
>
>LGPL has "virus like" aspects, especially :
>- what is considered "derivative work" and which automatically transform 
>all code to (L)GPL
>- distribution of any software + LGPL software in the same installer can 
>be considered a "derivative work"

I think you are confused about the LGPL, nobody could read this 
license and infer either of these things (it isn't a virus either).

>Would it be possible to license FreePV in another copyleft open source 
>license?
>I believe this can help to increase FreePV usage in more projects and 
>improve it.

I think that FreePV adoption is slowed by:

1. Nobody knowing about it - A release would be a good thing.
2. QuickTimeVR using the same mime-type as QuickTime-video, 
requiring both to be handled by the same application.

Unlikely but possible is that developers are turned off by the LGPL 
_not_ being the license that you think it is.

-- 
Bruno