Author Topic: OP2MapImager Development  (Read 2141 times)

Offline Hooman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3960
Re: OP2MapImager Development
« Reply #75 on: Today at 08:39:54 AM »
Quote
It sounds like statically linking to FreeImage does not fit the bill with what you would be comfortable with. So in the meantime we can just leave it in DLL form (which I think we can do and license or not license the rest of the code as we see fit). This has the added benefit of being less work.

Actually, from what I found in my reading, apparently static linking versus dynamic linking has no impact on the licensing. Either which way, if you're using FreeImage, your project must be GPL.

Quote
I'm just looking for the code to remain available for other people to review, edit, and compile as they see fit without assuming responsibility for any perceived damages the source code or compiled application could cause.

Sounds like you would agree with MIT or BSD licensing. The two appear to be basically equivalent. That's also what I would choose for my code. Those licenses are very minimal, doing basically only what you're asking here.

However, that's not a compatible license for something that uses FreeImage.

Using the GPL license would also mean your code is free for others to review, edit, and compile. Though it slaps on the restriction that if third parties distribute the code, original or modified, source or compiled, they must also make their copy/modifications of the source code available, and slap on the same restriction for anyone using it.


For now it sounds like you can just release your project as GPL and not worry too much about it. It will still be open source. Though if we want to get formal about licensing, I should attach a license to my portion. I would likely choose either MIT or BSD based on what I read today. That would be compatible with making your project GPL.

If someone wants to look into removing the FreeImage dependency, we could look into re-releasing the software package in the future under a new more permissive license. Basically we can punt this problem down the road. Only you would be able to re-release your project under a different license though. If you disappear, your code would be locked to GPL.


Is the FreeImage dependency restricted to OP2MapImager, or is it a part of OP2Utility? If it's not part of OP2Utility, you can license OP2Utility with a more permissive compatible license such as MIT or BSD, and then make the OP2MapImager project GPL.

Offline Hooman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3960
Re: OP2MapImager Development
« Reply #76 on: Today at 06:25:24 PM »
Noticed that GitHub links to Choose A License.

The 3 options on the short list are MIT, Apache, and GPL, depending on how permissive/restrictive you want to be. They also have longer lists with more licenses to choose from.


If we wanted to have some fun with this, we could always choose the wtfpl. :P

(On second thought, let's not choose that license)