RE: [MO-java-dev] MockObjects License

[Vincent M. <vm...@oc...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: moc...@li...
> [mailto:moc...@li...] On Behalf Of
> Jeff Martin
> Sent: 02 February 2002 13:32
> To: MockObjects
> Subject: Re: [MO-java-dev] MockObjects License
> 
> My opinion is that sticking with a BSD style license is best as it
leads
> to the least confusion, so it's less likely to scare people off (Most
> suit friendly).
> 
> The only problem with the current license is who actually holds the
> copyright. Having the ASF named in the mockobjects license is not
really
> good for either party as it leads to confusion and makes the whole
> licensing thing a bit of a joke.
> 
> All those in favor of current license with amended licenser raise you
> mouse hand now. ;o)

+1

> 
> 
> On Tue, 2002-01-29 at 15:22, Olaf Kock wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'll second LGPL. This means the library code itself is effectively
> > GPLed, but may be used (linked) in closed source development and
> > development of software licensed with any other license.
> >
> > see http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#LGPL for the license
text
> > as well as more information.
> >
> > > So that's not as bad as the GPL.
> >
> > You'll also find an article by R. Stallman at that url in which he
> > basically states that the LGPL is evil in most cases. I don't second
> > that opinion, though ;-)
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Olaf
> >
> > --
> >
> > abstrakt gmbh
> > Behringstrasse 16b
> > 22765 Hamburg
> > Tel: +49-40-39804630
> > Fax: +49-40-39804639
> > http://www.abstrakt.de/
> >
> > Wir sind umgezogen. Bitte beachten Sie
> > die neue Adresse + Telefonnr.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> > Moc...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
> --
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev