OSLib license

[Adam]

In message <47478D14.7010501 at doves.demon.co.uk>, Jonathan Coxhead wrote:

>    It would have been nice if the DeskLib/Desk people had seen in

Like John, I'm not sure of the link in this thread to DeskLib - but I've
only been involved with DeskLib for a relatively short time so maybe
there's some "history"? Unless revelant to the current discussion,
perhaps it's not worth worrying about.


> OSLib something that would have inspired them to use it as the base
> for their library: I think they could complement each other nicely.

I think it would be great (for a couple of reasons) for DeskLib to move
to using OSLib :)

This discussion about licencing is interesting, because presumably the
licences would need to be compatible if DeskLib starts using OSLib. The
current DeskLib licence is a bespoke one. I have suggested before that
it would be good to change it (I suggested MIT). Since then I've
compiled a list of documented contributors so might be in a position to
start trying to contact them to see if they'd agree to a licence change.

As for the actual licence, my main concern is one of clarity and
simplicity - since "IANAL"! The current unique DeskLib license isn't
very transparent and I also find the dual or triple license options
mentioned a bit scary!

Hence my current preference for the nice and simple MIT license.

Cheers,
Adam

-- 
Adam Richardson          Carpe Diem
http://www.snowstone.org.uk/riscos/