To create new wiki account, please join us on #znc at Libera.Chat and ask admins to create a wiki account for you. You can say thanks to spambots for this inconvenience.
Developer:License: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
>Jreese |
>Jreese 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
- 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