-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GPL vs. LGPL? #1
Comments
Sounds reasonable to me. |
Are you at liberty to consider BSD3, or MIT (I understand there are many, valid reasons to choose, don't get me wrong, please)? It would be very much in-line with other packages that simple (and postgresql-orm) depend on: see: |
Follow-up almost two years later: @ret is correct, If you want the simple* and postgres libraries to be really free the code should be BSD{2,3}/MIT/Apache licensed. LGPL is a huge problem when linking statically. |
Chiming in for BSD/MIT. If you don't have strong philosophical reasons for using GPL3, may I request you to use a more permissive license. As an industrial user evaluating pg-orm, I'm not sure what GPL3 would do to my SaaS app. |
Another chime for the liberal licenses, of which MIT is the simplest. Licenses which aren't liberal can and do cause Conversations With Legal™ which can get and do get drawn out to the point where most people just give up. |
@nd2s asked whether we'd change the license to LGPL instead of GPL as GPL is cumbersome to use in some settings, and all the simple-* code is LGPL anyway: alevy/simple.cx#1
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: