fenics team mailing list archive

["Garth N. Wells" <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 28/01/11 14:06, Harish Narayanan wrote:
> On 1/28/11 2:47 PM, Harish Narayanan wrote:
>> On 1/28/11 1:37 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 10:03:15PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
>>>> I've prepared drafts of the copyright consent forms:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.fenicsproject.org/pub/copyright/forms/
>>>>
>>>> Take a look and let the list know if you have any comments.
>>>> If we find that the documents look ok, we can start sending out
>>>> requests for signed consent forms.
>>>
>>> I haven't heard any objections to the design of the consent forms so I
>>> assume everyone's onboard. I will start sending out requests for forms
>>> shortly.
>>
>> The documents seem reasonable, except that I have one concern over the
>> (broad) scope. What if a contributor is OK with LGPL for some FEniCS
>> components, but doesn't see the purpose (or is not happy with, for
>> whatever reason) for other components.
>>
>> I understand the rationale behind LGPL for core components (DOFIN, FFC
>> etc.) but not, for e.g., FEniCS Apps.
> 
> I am going to further my query. Probably convoluted, but here it goes:
> 
> What constitutes a FEniCS app? Is it any application written based on
> components of the FEniCS project? Is it an application that gets listed
> on the FEniCS web site? And if one is going to force the license of the
> app, does that not defeat the purpose of LGPL'ing core FEniCS components[1]?
> 

My take is that an App gets to hang itself under the 'FEniCS App'
banner, and a qualifying requirement for that is a GPL/LGPL license. If
it's proprietary, it can't be a FEniCS App.

Garth

> Harish
> 
> [1] Which I am guessing would be to allow for proprietary apps to be
> written using an LGPL FEniCS.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp