|
I would use a GPL and LGPL combo. stronger GPL for the JVM, compiler and utilities, weaker LGPL for the Java library classes and anything else intended for reuse by 3rd party apps.
This would be akin to the licensing scenario for C/C++ programmers on Linux which use the LGPLed libc and libstdc++ and GPLed GCC compiler. This will enable someone to write closed source programs using such a licensed Java version, which is an understandable concern here, while discouraging forking of Java proper.
The alternative of using the Apache License or any other similar permissive non-copylefted license like the MIT license, is that by not enforcing a strong copyleft as the GPL does, will IMO lead to the continuation and proliferation of forking of Java versions, as is done today by IBM and others.
Another copylefted possible alternative to the GNU GPL family of licenses would be the Eclipse Public License. It is also a copylefted license, albeit a bit weaker which may raise issues with in with GPLed code. As a possible bonus is it would provide for more source interoperability with the Eclipse community.
|
java.net RSS Feeds
