Name for our license

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Name for our license

Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
Hello,

Often I need to tell anyone it's a good option to use the license from
the FPC RTL, but this license has no unique name, which leads to the
ackward need to use expressions like "the same license as the Runtime
Library from Free Pascal" or "The same license as the Lazarus
Component Library".

Modified LGPL just isn't good enought, because it's not unique enough.
Modified in which way? By who?

I would like to have a name for our license, what do you think? I suggest:

* Free Pascal LGPL --> shortened to FPLGPL

Having a name for the license will also make it possible for example,
that it is one day included in license templates in various places,
for example SourceForge.

There is no need to change the FPC and Lazarus code to use the new
license name, but new projects could start using it if it's agreed
upon as a standard name for the license, and template files can be
made for it.

thanks,
--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Jonas Maebe-2

On 20 Jun 2009, at 16:15, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:

> Modified LGPL just isn't good enought, because it's not unique enough.
> Modified in which way? By who?
>
> I would like to have a name for our license, what do you think? I  
> suggest:
>
> * Free Pascal LGPL --> shortened to FPLGPL

I think that would be a bad name, because
a) there is nothing specific to the FPC project about this license
b) many other projects also use this form of licensing (just google  
for "lgpl static linking exception" without the quotes)

Simply "LGPL with static linking exception" seems fine to me as a  
description.


Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
> I think that would be a bad name, because
> a) there is nothing specific to the FPC project about this license
> b) many other projects also use this form of licensing (just google  
> for "lgpl static linking exception" without the quotes)
>
> Simply "LGPL with static linking exception" seems fine to me as a  
> description.

http://wiki.freepascal.org/licensing

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Jürgen Hestermann
In reply to this post by Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
> * Free Pascal LGPL --> shortened to FPLGPL

I don't like acronyms, especially if they are more than 3 letters long.
Why not simply name it "Free Pascal Licence"?

Jürgen Hestermann.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Graeme Geldenhuys-4
In reply to this post by Jonas Maebe-2
Jonas Maebe wrote:
>>
>> * Free Pascal LGPL --> shortened to FPLGPL
>
> I think that would be a bad name, because
> a) there is nothing specific to the FPC project about this license

Felipe, I like the idea, but I have to agree with Jonas. I work on a few projects and some use the "modified lgpl" license as used by FPC's RTL and Lazarus. And no, those projects have nothing to do with Free Pascal Compiler or Lazarus project.


Regards,
 - Graeme -

________________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Graeme Geldenhuys-4
In reply to this post by Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
> ackward need to use expressions like "the same license as the Runtime
> Library from Free Pascal" or "The same license as the Lazarus
> Component Library".

I to honest I do not understand the ins and outs of the various licenses, but I read the following on the wikipedia site. The the following (below) mean that LGPL v3 license is similar to the "modified LGPL v2" that FPC and Lazarus use?  If so, then what about moving to the LGPL v3 license instead?

"Version 3 of the LGPL is constructed by applying a GPL linking exception to version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPL)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License


 
Regards,
 - Graeme -

________________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:

> > Library from Free Pascal" or "The same license as the Lazarus
> > Component Library".
>
> I to honest I do not understand the ins and outs of the various licenses,
> but I read the following on the wikipedia site. The the following (below)
> mean that LGPL v3 license is similar to the "modified LGPL v2" that FPC
> and Lazarus use?  If so, then what about moving to the LGPL v3 license
> instead?
>
> "Version 3 of the LGPL is constructed by applying a GPL linking exception
> to version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPL)."

No it does not, I think. It just says that the same process to construct LGPL3
from GPL3 is made as was to make LGPL2 from GPL2.

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Jonas Maebe-2
In reply to this post by Graeme Geldenhuys-4

On 21 Jun 2009, at 19:14, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

> I to honest I do not understand the ins and outs of the various  
> licenses, but I read the following on the wikipedia site. The the  
> following (below) mean that LGPL v3 license is similar to the  
> "modified LGPL v2" that FPC and Lazarus use?  If so, then what about  
> moving to the LGPL v3 license instead?
>
> "Version 3 of the LGPL is constructed by applying a GPL linking  
> exception to version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPL)."

The LGPL mandates that end users must be able to relink a program with  
different versions of the LGPL code. In practice, this amounts more or  
less to the LGPL being the GPL with a
a) dynamic linking exception (dynamically linking a program with the  
GPL requires the program to also have a GPL-compatible license), and
b) requirement that if you statically link against LGPL code, that you  
provide the end users with all object and other files required to  
relink the program with a different version of the LGPL code

The (static) linking exception to the LGPL (as used by FPC and others)  
means that requirement b) of the LGPL is removed.


Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Graeme Geldenhuys-4
In reply to this post by Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> No it does not, I think. It just says that the same process to construct LGPL3
> from GPL3 is made as was to make LGPL2 from GPL2.

Ah yes, I see what you mean. I read it to quickly and misunderstood the overall meaning.
My bad. :-(

 
Regards,
 - Graeme -

________________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Name for our license

Joost van der Sluis
In reply to this post by Jonas Maebe-2
Op zaterdag 20-06-2009 om 16:25 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Jonas
Maebe:

> On 20 Jun 2009, at 16:15, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
>
> > Modified LGPL just isn't good enought, because it's not unique enough.
> > Modified in which way? By who?
> >
> > I would like to have a name for our license, what do you think? I  
> > suggest:
> >
> > * Free Pascal LGPL --> shortened to FPLGPL
>
> I think that would be a bad name, because
> a) there is nothing specific to the FPC project about this license
> b) many other projects also use this form of licensing (just google  
> for "lgpl static linking exception" without the quotes)

This exception is often called the "classpath exception". So the license
we use already has a name.

> Simply "LGPL with static linking exception" seems fine to me as a  
> description.

That's also clear enough.

Joost.


_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal