Code license

[mvBarracuda]

What's set in stone at this point is that all sourcecode by the developers will be released under an open source license. The term open source license is quite a blurry one and the decision to leave things open was intentional as I wanted to hear the opinion of the interested programmers while ensuring that we don't go down the closed source route.

What kind of open source license would you prefer?

Some of the popular choices are:
* GPL 3
* LGPL 3
* MIT

You can find a detailed listing of possible licenses at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_software_licences

Open source definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Definition

[mvBarracuda]

To break the ice, I'll make the first step and propose to use the GPL v3. FIFE (engine as well as the Rio de hola client) is licensed under LGPL 2.1 and if we use Rio de hola as basis for PARPG, we'll need to release the modified Python scripts under LGPL anyway. As we're not aiming for any monetary profit, it makes sense to me to permit utilizing our code only under the terms of the GPL to avoid commercial exploitation, though that's rather unlikely anyway.

What do you think?

[icelus]

I favour GPL v3. I'm happy for my code to be passed around and played for free, but I don't have much sympathy for companies that want to hack it then release without source, that just seems wrong.

[maximinus]

GPL3

[mvBarracuda]

Oki, if nobody brings up any arguments for a different code license, we'll set the GPL3 in stone at Saturday :-)

[mvBarracuda]

And it has been set in stone: GPL 3.0 for the code.

[maximinus]

And it has been set in stone: GPL 3.0 for the code.

   All we now is code 


OK, relax folks, some of us are working on it....