Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

[Richard Gaskin]

Chip Thomas wrote:

> I am wondering if anyone on this list has shipped a Rev/Livecode project
> that communicated with a code library released under the GPL license, and if
> so, your reasons for making your LiveCode project GPL or non-GPL.
>
>
> The GPL license is clear that it is possible to have closed-source
> commercial code work with GPL licensed code in a way that does not violate
> the terms of the GPL license, the only thing is, it does not make the
> parameters altogether clear, to me anyway.

Volumes have been written about the GPL and FOSS in general.  Big topic, 
with many implications.

Do you have a project you're thinking of deploying under the GPL?
If so, what are you goals in doing so?

GPL can be a great option if it's what you need, but there are so many 
licenses available, and of course the creator of a work can define any 
terms he chooses, so it can be difficult to offer any brief 
recommendation one way or another without some details.

While looking at different licensing options a few months ago for a 
project I'd considered possibly GPL'ing, I came across one tip that may 
be useful:

It's easier to convert proprietary code to GPL than the other way 
around, so if you have any questions about whether to use GPL it may be 
prudent to consider more closed terms at first until those questions are 
answered.  You can always change it later.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World
  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
  LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv