[Freegis-list] Tkgeomap 2.0 released

[Radim Blazek]

On Monday 11 August 2003 09:11, you wrote:
> Any other application of BSD for any commercial purpose does not
> provide you with additional benefits over L(GPL). It only adds
> disadvantages compared to L(GPL).

Here are some LGPL disadvantages:
(by application I mean any application using LGPL library)
1) Staticaly linked application must be probably distributed also as source code.
   Yes, I say 'probably', because LGPL is not very clear, and I found 
   on the Web two kinds of explanations for article 6. a), one states 
   that object code is enough, the second that source code is required.
   Some people obviously read "object code and/or source code" as 
   "object code or source code", but it does not seem to be right.
   Also "permit modification of the work for the customer's own use" imposes
   distribution of source code, but that would apply to dynamicaly linked 
   application as well. Unfortunately, I cannot find any FAQ for LGPL.
2) The application cannot use any third party libraries or tools needed to build
   the application which are not standard part of OS and cannot be distributed with
   the application. For example library which can read proprietary data format, 
   available for download on Web, but without permission to redistribute it. 
   On Windows, compiler like "Visual C" is also such tool. 
   This is of course valid regardless the application is proprietary or free! 
3) "You must cause the files modified to carry prominent notices stating 
   that you changed the files and the date of any change." this does not block
   the use, but it is annoying and extra work.

If I look around, successful open source GIS projects don't use (L)GPL:
GDAL/OGR: MIT/X License
Mapserver: MapServer License (almost MIT/X)
PROJ4: MIT/X License

> Finally, I've found no evidence at all that L(GPL) harms the practical
> aspects of software. It only protects the freedom - thus if you mean
> that the license harms your practice to derive proprietary products from
> Free Software then of course you are right. 

The problem is that it complicates/disables the use of the LGPL library 
for both free and proprietary programs. 

> But in that case your
> anyway not interested in the ideas and values of Freedom and Free Software.

I am interested in free software when it is feasible and sensible. 
I am not interested to force people to do what FSF considers to be the best.

Radim