[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re[4]: [kDev] Which software license? A way forward...

Hi Kirit,

Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 7:20:28 AM, you wrote:

KS> * I may want to start with a base reference implementation that I can
KS> then tweak to differentiate myself. I would be willing to ship source
KS> that I was using, but I would also probably replace modules. This means
KS> that the API between modules needs to be well documented and I must be
KS> able to make use of those APIs without problem. As Dave says licensing
KS> the API is going to be hard, but I expect that the reference
KS> documentation will be the source for the reference implementation. I
KS> would need access to this, but still be able to write a closed source
KS> implementation

If you trademark Kendra, then you can do the same as Sun does with
Java: any module that uses our API may only call itself a "Kendra module"
or a "Kendra compliant module" if they follow the 'Kendra rules'.

Someone may contribute a module under the GPL, someone may contribute
a BSD source to replace our GPL one, someone may write their own
proprietry one from scratch and keep it closed source.

KS> * I would probably be using different platforms. Our development is
KS> centred around Microsoft platforms (for better or worse) and the current
KS> Kendra stuff seems to be PHP/Apache etc. This is something that I would
KS> probably look to use as a market differentiator to get customers to part
KS> with their cash. This should cause no problems on any license and I
KS> expect from a license perspective it is a non-issue, but it may mean
KS> that I may have to do a port of a module or two. Would I be willing to
KS> release this port as open source? That depends on a number of factors. I
KS> would prefer a license that allowed me to keep it closed if I wanted to.

PHP works equally well under IIS (MS) and Apache (MS/other platforms).
We use Microsoft platforms for developing PHP/Apache, and Linux for
production. There is no difference.