Re: What if Guile changed its license to be LGPL?

[tomas]

On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 02:55:41PM -0700, Per Bothner wrote:

[...]

> More importantly, if this complicates Guile and possibly lessens
> the "marketing power" of Guile, if may be in the FSF's interested
> to work out some kind of exception for Guile.  They don't have to
> change the license for GMP in general.  You can add some kind of
> exception where as long as an Guile application does not use the
> GMP C API directly, but only indirectly via Scheme code or other
> public Guile APIs, then the application is still covered by the
> Guile license, with exception.

IMHO: Please, don't. Complicated licenses also lessen the `marketing
power' of a product. I'd tend to Marius' approach of moving towards
LGPL and away from Guile exception, as long as there are no issues
with current users/uses. And if there are, I think it'd be worthwile
to try to resolve them.

[answering `yes' although Marius said only to answer in `no'
case, but I think the point of `license simplicity' is very
important: we have more and more small variations of open-ish
licenses these days]

Regards
-- tomas