RE: [Pyogclib-developers] ChangeLog and License

[<Jea...@CC...>]

Hello,

About the license: Personally I like it liberal :) I don't want to impose
Open-Source'ness on others. So that's why I'm going along with the choice of
MIT license.  Also, as Sean stated, it follows the licenses used by many
other open GIS tools such as GDAL/OGR and UMN MapServer, and is less likely
to cause confusion if someone were to implement some sort of GIS processing
system that is made up of all of these but with difference licenses. The
more flexible, the fewer worries, IMHO.

Indeed, thuban looks like a cool tool indeed, I'm going to have to give it a
try soon :) I now realize you're the man behind the Python PROJ interface,
which Frank sent me a while back, and I have been using with Zope ... It'd
be nice to have it merged into the PROJ distribution :)

Although I can see uses for a WFS Cient in thuban, I have to admit it
wouldn't be a killer add-on yet.  What might be of interest though is the
fact that as part of the WFS implementation, there is the beginning of some
GML support, which could in turn be used to read GML files, much in the same
way you would read shapefiles.  But then again I guess OGR has that already
? Or the beginnings of it ? I think support was added as part of various
MapServer OGC improvements, though it looks liek it isn't documented yet.

J.F.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan-Oliver Wagner [mailto:ja...@in...]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 7:22 AM
To: pyogclib developer mailing list
Subject: Re: [Pyogclib-developers] ChangeLog and License


On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 06:03:35PM -0600, Sean Gillies wrote:
> We're using the MIT-style license because pyogclib's most immediate use
> is in support of other similarly licensed software.  Other software that
> we are familiar with are also similarly licensed.  GDAL, PROJ4 for 
> example.
> I've got nothing against the LGPL except that I don't feel like I fully
> understand it.

the main conceptual difference is that LGPL protects the freedom
of the software while MIT allows to derive proprietary versions.
Both licenses, however, allow to link with proprietary software.
My personal preference is towards freedom-protecting licenses
so that no-one except the authors can relicense the code.

> I'm excited that you're interested in using it with Thuban.  I've been
> very busy on other work lately but will be putting in some time on
> pyogclib tomorrow.  I think that the WFS stuff is ready for release
> and that we're only waiting on the WMS modules and on some docs and
> web pages.

WMSClient is the one I will have a look at first. WFS might be of
interest at a later stage.

Best

	Jan
-- 
Jan-Oliver Wagner               http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH	              	     http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS	                               http://freegis.org/


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Pyogclib-developers mailing list
Pyo...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyogclib-developers