Re: [q-lang-users] License of Q programs

[Peter M. <pet...@wa...>]

John Cowan wrote:
> Albert Graef scripsit:
> 
>> Not really. I think that it shouldn't be too difficult to freely use Q
>> in other open source projects (i.e., projects under some OSI-approved
>> license, is that the case with Erlang?). But IANAL so any advice is
>> appreciated. 
> 
> There really aren't any open-source licenses of the type you are
> discussing (i.e. that allow the code to be used in open-source but not
> proprietary projects).

Actually there might be a very easy way out: GPLv3. Q already contains 
"or later" text so it's usable under v3 (once that comes out) and v3 
seems to be compatible with a lot more licenses than v2.

Whether it's compatable with the Erlang Public License isn't clear yet, 
but probably not an important point as I've given up on the Erlang node 
project. It turned out the Erlang API lacks documentation in various 
important points (like what the fields of a basic struct are and how 
they behave under what circumstances) so porting is a bit too 
complicated for me. Plus the current Erlang C lib didn't provide the 
high level support that I kinda expected (unlike the Java lib which is 
plug-in-and-use).

Greetings,

Peter