On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 18:20, Lars Dybdahl wrote:
Forget the GPL. I point you in the direction of the libspf license
which is a derivative of the Apache license. Its such a great license
since everyone benefits:
I totally agree. The GPL sets a lot of limitations we don't need here.
My experience with the Apache license is, that it works. People do
contribute, and it attracts a much larger audience if you license
under the Apache license.
Um, as I said in my response to James, my intent is not to debate the
merits of one license over another as I believe that discussion has no
place on this list. I only bring it up because there are ALREADY at
least a few MTAs out there that use this, according to some (but not
me), 'unfortunate' license.
It's bad enough that, whether Old SPF or New SPF, we are 'breaking'
SMTP. (I'm of the opinion that we *need* to break SMTP just little bit
at least.) Let's not go down the path of breaking entire software
packages with real, minority or not, userbases because we can't come up
with something that *everybody* can implement, GPL or not.
--
-Paul Iadonisi
Senior System Administrator
Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux.
GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets