Re: ckermit: license advice
> The other model used sometimes is to dual license. Provide a free
> version under the GPL and a sell a version that companies can take
> proprietary. Whether this makes sense with kermit, of course, I have no
> idea -- it depends mostly on how the large unix vendors in question are
> using the kermit code (are they simply including it in the OS
> distribution, or using the code in new products?).
As far as I know, kermit is only ever used as a standalone binary, so
I can't see a way to make this apply.
> It could also get a bit tricky with contributions -- if people
> contribute new code under the GPL the kermit folks wouldn't be able
> to add it to the for-proprietary version. If they chose this model
> they'd have to get permission for this from contributors.
That would also be a problem (or plain impossible), the kermit codebase
dates back to at least 1985, and a *lot* of people have contributed
features/bugfixes.
Thanks,
Ian.
--
Ian Beckwith - ianb@nessie.mcc.ac.uk - http://nessie.mcc.ac.uk/~ianb/
GPG fingerprint: AF6C C0F1 1E74 424B BCD5 4814 40EC C154 A8BA C1EA
Listening to: Handsome Family - Through the Trees - Stalled
Reply to: