I thought companies might be more interested in contributing to CDK if it is under apache 2.0.. 


On Friday, March 28, 2014 1:07 PM, John May <johnmay@ebi.ac.uk> wrote:

I choose BSD for new projects but it would be a lot of work to track down and get confirmation from everyone. 

Java is a bit of an odd ball since, almost everything is dynamically linked, the only exception being static variables

GNU’s official stance with Java is that "Applications which link to LGPL libraries need not be released under the LGPL" - https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html. I might add that to the README actually.


On 28 Mar 2014, at 06:17, Egon Willighagen <egon.willighagen@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Lochana,

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:43 AM, lochana menikarachchi
<lochanac@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is there any reason to distribute CDK under LGPL license?

CDK was licensed LGPL because it was based on CompChem, Jmol, and
JChemPaint were LGPL.

Why not apache license?

I do not remember the reasons why those tools had that license.

If I had to (chance to) change the license of the CDK (which involves
getting in contact with a lot of people and getting approval) is to
move to BSD or MIT, not Apache...

What would it add? People already can embed the CDK in proprietary
software; I know the linking is always a bit unclear, but to me
(personally), anything not changing the CDK classes itself, is

Why would you not choose LGPL?

Also, did you guys thought about incubating CDK as an apache project??

What would that add? I sounds to me we would get a lot more formal
meeting if we would, distracting us from the work... ?

My 2 cents...


E.L. Willighagen
Department of Bioinformatics - BiGCaT
Maastricht University (http://www.bigcat.unimaas.nl/)
Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers
ORCID: 0000-0001-7542-0286

Cdk-user mailing list


Cdk-user mailing list