Is Python fit for multi-tired apps?

[Graham Dumpleton]

steven_shaw at users.sourceforge.net (Steven Shaw) wrote in message news:<503ca784.0109262310.461e0dd8 at posting.google.com>...
> grahamd at dscpl.com.au (Graham Dumpleton) wrote in message news:<dc6f5c99.0109191612.5763a09f at posting.google.com>...
> > OSE can be found at "http://ose.sourceforge.net". The documentation for the
> > Python interfaces is more up to date than that for the C++ components, so if
> > you look through that it will give you the best idea of what the system can do.
> 
> As I understand it, OSE cannot be used with proprietary applications.
> Probably something that needs mentioning up front when you are
> promoting it.

What you say isn't strictly true. OSE uses the Q Public License (QPL), an
Open Source license, which if you read it properly can be used in proprietary
applications provided that you aren't distributing that application in which
case you would need to provide your source code for free.

Thus, you can quite happily develop in house applications for a company no
problems. In the majority of cases companies never want to distribute their
applications anyway, so use of the QPL is therefore not a problem. On the web
site there is a reasonably in depth discussion of the licensing issues
surrounding the use of OSE in a commercial environment. Utimately though,
you still need to read the license to understand it.

Further, an alternate license agreement can also be purchased which is alluded
to on the site with an email address for details given. More precise details
of the latter are being prepared for inclusion on another site. At the moment
it isn't seen that such information should be on SourceForge.

In other words, if you want to build an application and make a profit from it,
but expect not have to pay for anything you use, then you will be dissappointed.
If however you are an Open Source proponent you should not have a problem since
the QPL is an approved Open Source license, it just doesn't give you absolute
carte blanche like some other Open Source licenses.

Would you be happier if OSE were instead released under the GPL, which in
some respects is even worse for business in respect of building proprietary
applications. And no I don't in general support Microsoft's views with regard
to Open Source, but I am sure I am likely to get flamed for this comment
anyway.