Project: DomainPatrol (Managed by Peter Narlund, anders.nygren@infoware.se)
 | 
 | |
| Subject | All or nothing? |
| Created | 10/03/2007 07:46 AM by Peter Narlund. |
| Modified | 10/03/2007 07:47 AM by Peter Narlund. |
Thank you for all well thought through posts, and an interesting discussion. I will try to summarize my opinion of mixing open and closed software like this, and explain why I think DomainPatrol belong on OpenNTF.
First, let’s have a look at the potential legal issue that came up in the discussion:
The DomainPatrol open source project uses LGPL, not GPL that has been mentioned in this discussion. There are important differences, so let’s not get confused.
From the LGPL:
{A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.}
My understanding of this is that the scanner software license (using a proprietary license) has nothing to do with how the DomainPatrol Template (the library) is licensed.
I understand that some of you might want to discuss the details of this interpretation - I don't think this is the best forum for that kind of legal discussion though. Try the Free Software Foundation website for this at http://fsf.org
From Doug, in the discussion:
{If the open source bit can't work without the closed source bit, you can't use the LGPL and need to rethink how you're offering the open source part of the application.}
I just want to make sure that ju all understand that this is a personal oppinion of Doug. I can't find any legal paragraphs on usability in any of the free open source licenses.
Now, let’s talk about the moral issue of publishing DomainPatrol on OpenNTF:
Yes, it is true that to use the software as originally intended you will need the Scanner, which, since it’s not open, must be downloaded from our website and cannot be published at OpenNTF.
The database, which is in fact Open Source and the code within can be reused in other projects. I think that is better than not sharing any part of the tool at all...?
From the page About OpenNTF:
“OpenNTF is a site devoted to getting groups of individuals all over the world to collaborate on Lotus Notes/Domino applications and release them as open source. Our mission is "to provide a framework for the community to develop open source applications for IBM Lotus Notes and Domino which may be freely distributed". Using open source applications can help organizations reduce the costs of software development and maintenance.”
The intention from my side was not to make DomainPatrol a collaborative Open Source project - I do not expect people to contribute to any greater extent. The idea was rather to provide the community with a really good, free tool to that can reduce the cost of maintaining their environments and use the code in our tool to reduce costs and cut time in their own software projects.
Like most people and companies I and DomainPatrol need to make money on something. In this case the idea is that some of the users will want to have support, software maintenance and the functionality of the purchase version.
Yes, OpenNTF is a way for DomainPatrol to reach more users, and in the long run perhaps also customers for the purchase version. At the same time we provide useful code and a free tool that a lot of people can benefit from.
No, I don’t think of that as a clever marketing scheme, it seems like a fair deal to me.
Peter Närlund
http://domainpatrol.org
|
Feedback
Check out other projects
Switch to project: 