To create new wiki account, please join us on #znc at freenode and ask admins to create a wiki account for you. You can say thanks to spambots for this inconvenience.

Difference between revisions of "Developer:License"

From ZNC
Jump to: navigation, search
(The list)
m (LGPL 3)
Line 25: Line 25:
 
*  
 
*  
 
Cons:
 
Cons:
* ZNC is not a library
+
* ZNC is not a library (Don't need to be a library to use the "Lesser" GPL license. [[User:Jreese|Jreese]] ([[User talk:Jreese|talk]]) 17:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC))
  
 
=== [http://opensource.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 Apache 2.0] ===
 
=== [http://opensource.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 Apache 2.0] ===

Revision as of 17:19, 20 December 2012

Switch ZNC from GPL 2 to another license

See https://github.com/znc/znc/issues/218

What we want?

  • Ability to use stuff licensed under Apache license in ZNC
  • Ability to use stuff licensed under GPL 2 license in ZNC
    • Iris or qwebirc
      • But iris is loaded as separate process, and ZNC communicates with it via socket, so it's not an issue, according to this and this
  • Anything else?

The list

GPL 3

Pros:

Cons:

  • Incompatible with GPLv2 and thus conflicts with "What we want": [1]

LGPL 3

Pros:

Cons:

  • ZNC is not a library (Don't need to be a library to use the "Lesser" GPL license. Jreese (talk) 17:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC))

Apache 2.0

Pros:

  • Most liberal license that still protects any project trademarks.

Cons:

BSD (2-clause or 3-clause?)

Pros:

  • Extremely liberal license.
  • 3-clause license restricts usage of

Cons:

MIT

Pros:

  • Extremely liberal license.

Cons:

  • Basically identical to 2-clause BSD license.

Anything else?

Comparison of Free and Open Source Licenses - Wikipedia

Licenses By Category - Open Source Initiative

Useful links