Z80 Emulation Engine

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Tuesday, 22 April 2014 at 06:41:58 UTC, Manu via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 22 April 2014 16:29, Jacob Carlborg via 
> Digitalmars-d-announce
> <digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> On 22/04/14 07:57, Manu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I understand the license options essentially, but it's 
>>> more than
>>> just the license text, there are license cultures that affect 
>>> the
>>> decision, and people are borderline religious about this sort 
>>> of
>>> thing.
>>> I mean, the GPL seems fine to me, but there are many people 
>>> who see
>>> GPL and avoid it like the plague as a matter of superstition 
>>> or
>>> something. I'd prefer to not discourage interest or 
>>> contribution just
>>> because I wrote "GPL" near my code.
>>> Then people invented LGPL and in my experience, this makes 
>>> some of
>>> them feel okay with it, and others still don't wanna go near 
>>> it.
>>>
>>> What practical reasons are there to avoid GPL if your 
>>> software is
>>> fundamentally open-source?
>>> Ideally, I'd like something like GPL, with the option that I 
>>> can grant
>>> someone an exception to the license upon request.
>>
>>
>> If you want to use some library that is not GPL, or 
>> incompatible with GPL.
>> Or the opposite. If someone wants to use your code, but not 
>> want to use GPL,
>> but still an open source license. BSD, for example, is much 
>> more flexible in
>> these cases.
>
> But then you lose the incentive to return contribution back to 
> the
> original community.
> I've worked in companies where we take OSS libraries, modified 
> for our
> needs, and never offer the modifications back to the community. 
> I've
> done it myself, and it's basically wrong.
> I am not aware of the license that encourages community 
> contribution,
> but also doesn't infect your code like the plague?

That would be the CDDL, which Sun came up with for OpenSolaris, 
and other file-based licenses like the MPL, which Mozilla came up 
with for the open-sourcing of Netscape:

https://glassfish.java.net/public/CDDLv1.0.html

The CDDL is like the GPL, in that CDD-licensed files have to stay 
open source when redistributed, but since it applies on a 
file-by-file basis, doesn't infect the rest of the codebase.  
Others can compile your CDD-licensed files with their own files 
that they license differently, as long as they provide the source 
for your CDDL files, including any modifications they've made to 
your files.

All that said, simple licenses, like the BSD or MIT licenses, are 
probably best, because they work with almost everything else.