[Bitpim-devel] Licensing (again :-)

[Roger B. <ro...@ro...>]

I have been made aware that it will be a really good idea to
update BitPim to use the Artistic License Version 2.0 due
to many loopholes in version 1.0.  (That is mainly due to
the age of version 1.0 back when there were fewer lawyers
and fewer scumbags).

I would like to go ahead with this, but need the consent of
the other copyright holders (ie your name is on one or more
source files).

Here is a list of issues in 1.0:

http://dev.perl.org/perl6/rfc/211.html

Here is 2.0:

http://dev.perl.org/perl6/rfc/346.html

Note that I am not proposing dual licensing.  Several of the
3rd party components would not work if BitPim was GPL, and
there is no value in BitPim being LGPL.

One of my major concerns is people making modified versions
of BitPim and misrepresenting them as the main version as has
happened once already.  AL 2.0 absolutely locks that down.
It also ensures that redistributed versions are open source.

Roger