Hi, thanks for the answer! Finally I decided to release the project under MIT X11. Previously I misunderstood GPL and I thought it is not allowed to use GPL code from MIT code, but it is true only if you want to use the source code of the GPL program. Dynamic linking is possible. The MIT licence allows to use my framework in commercial software, but it may constrain me later (if I will need to integrate some GPL source code), so it is possible that I will change to GPL some time. Regards, Miklos On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Ceki Gülcü <ceki@qos.ch> wrote:
Hello Espák,
On 04/01/2010 1:09 PM, Espák Miklós wrote:
Hi,
I am developing a framework over Prolog APIs for Java. It is a facade for Prolog implementations, just like SLF4J is for logging APIs.
I used some code from SLF4J, and I have modified that for my purposes. I renamed the files (e.g. LoggerFactory to ProverFactory).
I want to release the software under LGPL. The MIT license of SLF4J permits this.
Which of the following is the correct way of doing this?
1. I drop the MIT licence, and use LGPL, reserving the copyright statement of the original authors, and adding my copyright, e.g. in the following way: "Copyright by<me>, under LGPL License. Credits to XY for the original code of ZYX from library SLF4J.
As far as I know, as long as you keep the original copyright, you would be complying with the license, as it explicitly allows sub-licensing. However, you may not remove the existing copyright.
2. I keep the MIT licence and the copyright statement of the original authors and add my copyright because of the modifications. This way certain files would be licenced under the MIT licence, and most of the source files under LGPL.
I would prefer the first version, if possible, so that I do not need to use several licences in the same project.
Option 1 is fine.
Regards,
Miklos Espak
_______________________________________________ slf4j-dev mailing list slf4j-dev@qos.ch http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/slf4j-dev