Quote: Original post by Edward Ropple

Quote: If someone doesn't want to give back then they won't no matter what license you put on your code.

I imagine Monsoon thought the same until the SFLC came after them. How'd that go for them?

That was over distributing a GPL library (or parts of it) in a commercial, non-open source product; not for failing to redistribute changes made to an LPGL piece of software.

Quote:

Quote: I'll admit that there is no amount of arguing that could convince me that either GPL or LGPL are ever worth using

Shortsighted and regrettable, but it is your choice.

Correct, it is my choice and therefore neither shortsighted nor regrettable. I understand what I want to get out of creating libraries and writing software and therefore know what licenses I do and do not want to use. You may see value in forcing people to release changes to your library but I don't. I give my code out to the world with self gratification knowing that I created something that is helping other people. I hardly even care about attribution because I know that I contributed to the world of software (though a friendly plug is always nice).

In the end, as I basically said above, it's all opinion as to what license fits your library and "views" better. I prefer the less restrictive licenses; others prefer more restrictive license. Neither is any more or less correct in the same sense that neither C++ or C# is more correct. Just pick whichever one you prefer and call it good.