2 Jun
2005
2 Jun
'05
3:07 p.m.
I am interested to hear other people's thoughts about this.
I have been considering embedding xwiki in an app, however I was a little
concerned about the GPL license - I would prefer an ASL (presuming that this
means apache software license). I'd then also be happy to help contribute
on this project. It seems to have a great feature set and it uses
technologies that I am familiar with.
Cameron
-----Original Message-----
From: Ludovic Dubost [mailto:ludovic@xwiki.com]
Sent: Thursday, 2 June 2005 7:12 AM
To: xwiki-dev(a)objectweb.org
Subject: [xwiki-dev] Considering a licence change
Hi Contributors,
I'd like to open a discussion about a licence change. I've been thinking
for a while to open up the licence more.
Currently the code is GPL which allows end-users (including commercial
companies using XWiki internally or for their web sites) to use XWiki
without being required to contribute code back, but requires software
distributors to contribute all modifications using the GPL.
Until version 0.9.543 there was only code from myself in it which
allowed me to double licence code, which has been done with one company
in the US who has embedded XWiki in a proprietary product.
Starting with release 0.9.793, XWiki has significant contributions from
other users which if we want to be able to allow this company or others
in the future to use XWiki in compliance with the open-source licence we
need to:
1/ Either get the right from ALL contributors to allow XPertNet to
double-licence the contributions for proprietary usage and charge for it
as well as support.
2/ Open up the licence to a licence which would allow them to do it
without a double licence. This licence could be LGPL or ASL. Customers
could still take a support contract with XPertNet.
I'd like to hear the opinions of everybody and of course especially of
contributors who have commited code to XWiki. Which route should be go
from your point of view and are you willing to relicence your code to
any of the licence proposed (giving the right to double licence,
changing licence to LGPL or changing licence to ASL).
This question is also true for Jens who has contributed the Lucene
plugin and the email notification plugin but to a lesser extent as these
are plugins and could keep a separate licence. It would just restrict
specific usage of these specific plugins.
Whatever we decide, we will need to create some documents that
contributors would sign to specifically accept the conditions under with
the contributions are made to the code base.
Ludovic
--
Ludovic Dubost
XPertNet: http://www.xpertnet.fr/
Blog: http://www.ludovic.org/blog/
XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost AIM: nvludo Yahoo: ludovic