[melbourne-pug] OS license requirements

[Mike Dewhirst]

On 11/08/2014 2:45 PM, Oliver Nagy wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> I do not seem to be able to post to the list, so here is a private
> reply.
>
> I believe you want the Mozilla Public License. It is similar in
> spirit to the LGPL but allows your code to be freely mixed with other
> (proprietary) code.
>
> You can find the license here https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/
>
> A useful explanation is here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License.
>
> And a brief discussion about the differences between LGPL and MPL is
> here:
>
> http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/221365/mozilla-public-license-mpl-2-0-vs-lesser-gnu-general-public-license-lgpl-3-0

It certainly seems more permissive from a technical perspective.

However, not being compiled software, I can't see much effective 
difference between the two licenses with respect to dynamic and static 
linking.

The advice which seems worth thinking about the most is whether the Free 
Software Foundation or the Mozilla Foundation will help if their license 
is breached.

Not sure there - although I am aware of FSF efforts in Europe.

Thanks Oli

Mike

>
>
>
> Good luck!
>
> Best, Oli
>