GPL or LGPL

Fletcher, Bob (GEAE) bob.fletcher@ae.ge.com
Tue Feb 29 05:40:00 GMT 2000


We haven't used GSL up to this point. I've been following the development. We do
a lot of numerical work and often end up writing our own.  I was interested to
see if we could use, and maybe even contribute to, GSL.  (We don't sell
software,  we write it for our own use.)

The problem with GPL for us, is that the programs we would write using a
numerical library are proprietary. They would reflect out design practices, and
we want to protect them. (but not sell them). We do however need to distribute
them to suppliers, partners and customers. If we use GPL libraries, we'd have to
GPL these and give our partners source. Since our partners are often our
competitors, we can't do this. So, no GPL libraries.

An interesting point. We sometimes do work with NASA. They have their own
license requirements. I expect that we would not be able to use GPL libraries on
a NASA project because the licenses would conflict !

Bob
or
(Dr. R.S. Fletcher  UW Madison, Elementary Particle Physics Phenomenology
Institute, '90: (Just to prove I belong ;)  )

_________________________________________________
Bob Fletcher,                                                        Phone:
(513) 552-2432  (GE 8*892-2432)
GEAE Analysis and Engineering Systems              FAX:  (513) 552-3153  (GE
8*892-3153)
1 Neumann Way,  M/D  T207
Cincinnati OH  45215-6301
Bob.Fletcher@ae.ge.com


> ----------
> From: 	Mark Galassi[SMTP:rosalia@lanl.gov]
> Sent: 	Friday, February 25, 2000 11:20 AM
> To: 	gsl-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
> Subject: 	Re: GPL or LGPL
> 
> 
> Dear Bob,
> 
> It's interesting to see someone at GE AE on the list.  What have you
> been using GSL for?  (If you can say, of course...)
> 
> You can certainly use GSL internally; you just can't make a non-GPLed
> product out of it.
> 
> You should certainly consider coming out with a GPLed product that
> uses it: many companies make good revenue with GPLed products.
> 
> We are not sympathetic to the argument "I really want to use your
> library to make a proprietary product..."
> 
> Your examples of institutions that have put out products under a
> university-style license (like the X11 license or the new BSD license)
> is not all that enlightening: the real lesson to me is that these
> products (like Tk and X) have been frequently put into non-free
> products.
> 
> GPL supporters don't get that "feeling of pride" from widespread
> adoption: they get the happy feeling from widespread adoption in
> *free* products.
> 


More information about the Gsl-discuss mailing list