Jump to content

Licence on open source


Recommended Posts

I am wondering aboout what type of license to use. LGPL or BSD (or maybe some other). I have read through some old discussions here, but since they are 4-5 years old, maybe something has changed. BSD is recommended here, but it is not entirely clear why LGPL is not recommended.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told (possibly incorrectly) that both BSD and LGPL were very close. The explanation given was you can use it in commercial applications, and you can modify it, but the author must be attributed. I was not aware that LGPL was the one less recommended.

My knowledge on licensing is limited so please someone correct me if I am misinformed.

Edited by hooovahh
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always like rolfk's explanation at http://lavag.org/top...post__p__25413.

LGPL potentially requires segmenting your code into libraries that may not be natural to the architecture. BSD is much more permissive, in that it simply requires notices on the affected code, but doesn't really require an architecture change.

I thought http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/03/24/a-short-guide-to-open-source-and-similar-licenses/ was a pretty good summary, too.

Joe Z.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What license you choose to use depends entirely on what rights you want to give users. BSD allows users to do pretty much anything with your code. LGPL maintains the GPL's copyleft policy if the source code is modified, but allows users to link to libraries released under LGPL without requiring it to also be released under LGPL.

You can also choose other licenses if you want. LapDog is released with a Rootbeerware license.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always like rolfk's explanation at http://lavag.org/top...post__p__25413.

LGPL potentially requires segmenting your code into libraries that may not be natural to the architecture. BSD is much more permissive, in that it simply requires notices on the affected code, but doesn't really require an architecture change.

I thought http://www.smashingm...milar-licenses/ was a pretty good summary, too.

Joe Z.

Yes, I have read all that, and that's why I am wondering. LGPL is supposedly too restrictive when used in a Labview environment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I would like to implement a couple of VIs which are licensed under the LGPL for an application in my company, then I would have to build a packaged project library (PPL) in order to prevent a licensing problem. The PPL can then easily be linked as external library from the build.

This will obviously get more complex if I want to implement LGPL licensed VIs from several sources (which I can't pack into one PPL as I understand the license).

I would have no problem with the BSD license, since there is no copyleft.

Therefore the BSD license is prefered from the view of a company and for the sake of maintainable source codes.

Greetings, LogMAN

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I would like to implement a couple of VIs which are licensed under the LGPL for an application in my company, then I would have to build a packaged project library (PPL) in order to prevent a licensing problem. The PPL can then easily be linked as external library from the build.

This will obviously get more complex if I want to implement LGPL licensed VIs from several sources (which I can't pack into one PPL as I understand the license).

I would have no problem with the BSD license, since there is no copyleft.

Therefore the BSD license is prefered from the view of a company and for the sake of maintainable source codes.

Greetings, LogMAN

There is no problem including external libraries, several of them, and keep them nice and tidy and separately when distributing the source (directly from the source distribution in the build). Maybe this problem only exist when distributing exe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no problem including external libraries, several of them, and keep them nice and tidy and separately when distributing the source (directly from the source distribution in the build). Maybe this problem only exist when distributing exe?

Yes, I was actually refering to exe files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By OGK.nz
      Since stumbling across the  G Package Manager (GPM) while looking through this discussion on package managing I can't shake the idea that is is precisely the system that I would like to implement throughout the rest of the developers in my team for working on LabVIEW projects across multiple sites and with parallel upgrades to code to handle ongoing facility updates.
      However as I am sure is the case with many companies, we need to maintain our data locally for corporate reasons. There was a reference to being able to have a local repository in the initial NI Week presentation by Derek but since then I have not seen any other reference to it and there is limited information available about the processes. Has anyone got any experience with the operation of GPM for internal use, or even any use with GPM in general? From looking through the Lava and NI forums, doesn't seem like many people have picked it up or at least haven't posted anything about their experiences with it.
    • By Benoit
      Manufacturing a satellite or a simple pen require to test the quality of the product before delivery to the customer.
      LabVIEW is widely used for that purpose. Since 20 years of LabVIEW development I saw numerous test framework. I was wondering if people where interested to work in a collective and open source test framework.
      Per example the following feature can be included:
      HAL (hardware abstraction layer)
      Database to record test results with the data viewer (PostgreSQL)
      single/asynchronous/batch/debug mode
      multi-language support
      Image analysis (open CV) + bar code reader
      User access level
      Remote monitoring
      Jig identification to prevent user error (testing the wrong product with the wrong jig/test sequence)
      HTML/xml/txt report
      and so on....
      Benoit
    • By Rolf Kalbermatter
      It's nothing to fancy. I added a few things to the UI to support more features and in preparation of adding the VI renamining/relinking step that was done seperately in the OpenG DEAB tool before calling the OpenG package builder. But I never got around to really add the deab part into the package builder. It's kind of extra difficult as the DEAB compononent doesn't currently support newer features like lvclass and lvlib at all and of course no mallable VIs etc.
      I can post what I have somewhere, but don't get to excited.
    • By John Lokanis
      One of the main topics of the 2018 CLA Summit was the need to improve access to open source code in the LabVIEW community.  This is something that I have tried to do in the past with limited success.  After hearing what others are doing and discussing the issues, I am inspired to take on the task of getting as much of my code that is shareable out into the open for others to use, improve, learn from and critique.  So, the point of this thread is to figure out how best to do that.
      I have tried posting code to forums in the past.  I have even posted to the code repository here on LAVA.  I have used code posted here and via the tools network and VIPM in my own projects.  But I am not sure if any of those avenues are the right path forward for me.  There was much discussion about different open source repositories on the interwebs that we could leverage.  There was also some discussion about how to help others discover the code you shared.  What I did not hear was any definitive conclusions on how best to do this.
      So, the point of this thread is to try to solicit feedback on code sharing and come to some sort of consensus on the best options out there.  If you have an opinion on this please join the conversation and share what you think is the best solution.   Here are some questions I am trying to answer:
      1. Where should we share code?  What system works best for LabVIEW code and is user friendly enough to not discourage people from using it?  Please share links and how-to documents for your preferred site/system.
      2. How should we license code?  I heard some discussion about the various type of licenses.  I am not interested in retaining any rights to code I share and do not want to put any burdens on those who want to use and learn from any code I share.  What licence is accepted in the open source community that supports this kind of sharing?
      3. Once we post, how do we make our code discoverable?  Do we need to post links all over the place or is there a better way?  Here is one attempt at making that better you should check out if you have not already: 
       
      I am not just interested in putting the code out there, but also trying to explain why I think it is worth your time to take a look.  I am willing to post on forums, create a blog, even produce some vlogs on YouTube if it is the best option.   Please let me know what format would motivate you to take the time to learn about the open source code out there.
      Either way, thanks for taking the time to read this thread and contribute what you can, even if it is just to follow the discussion and learn from others like I am trying to do.
      -John
    • By oskretc
      This maybe has been ask/answered/discuss before but here it is.
       
       
      Is there any VIPM alternative out there?
       
      If not, It will be very interesting to start a discussion whether an open source version is feasible and how many members in the community are willing to work on it.
       
      I know JKI has a great product already but seems like development has come to halt wrt VIPM.
       
      Any comments?
       
       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.