I favor:<br><br>2-clause BSD<br>MIT<br><br>I'd be interested to hear Tobi's view on the subject.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Florian Forster <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rrdtool@nospam.verplant.org">rrdtool@nospam.verplant.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">Hi Kevin and Sebastian,<br>
<br>
I would like to open up the rrdcached client interface so it can be used<br>
from non-GPL applications. For that I would like to re-license the two<br>
files<br>
<br>
src/rrd_client.h and<br>
src/rrd_client.c<br>
<br>
to a more permissible license. I was thinking about using the MIT<br>
license or the LGPL "2.1 or later".<br>
<br>
As far as I see, you two are the only other copyright holders on those<br>
files [0]. Would a license change be okay for you? If so, which license<br>
do you prefer?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
—octo<br>
<br>
[0] It is kind of hard to tell because SVN doesn't differentiate between<br>
author and committer. The mail goes to the mailing list as well, so<br>
if I missed a contribution please speak up! The files list me as the<br>
sole copyright holder which I believe is outdated.<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
Florian octo Forster<br>
Hacker in training<br>
GnuPG: 0x91523C3D<br>
<a href="http://verplant.org/" target="_blank">http://verplant.org/</a><br>
</font><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)<br>
<br>
iD8DBQFLu4SeHdggu3Q05IYRAgkSAJ9e4PkMIxBpoAVs56r2T/Qmpd6+cwCgmK3H<br>
gEWvpZ9RBIsE7cVL1WZGMvQ=<br>
=sZ5r<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br> kevin brintnall =~ /<a href="http://kbrint@rufus.net/">kbrint@rufus.net/</a><br><br>