Closed bluca closed 8 years ago
Yes, that is a good solution.
On 22 Aug 2016 10:55 pm, "Luca Boccassi" notifications@github.com wrote:
@hintjens https://github.com/hintjens - shall we make it consistent? If so, to GPL-3+ ?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/imatix/gsl/issues/125, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASzCCI5e5S8DplFiJsk13GOOrsXJd-Xks5qigylgaJpZM4JqS3c .
Quick question on this line. May be answered elsewhere, but just to confirm: the code generated by this tool - can be it used in some other license (say commercial or MIT etc.), or would it be covered by GPL?
Usually GPL does not cover the output of a program and IMO the output / code generated by this tool is free to be licensed under any license. But just want to reconfirm with the owners of this tool, before looking into the tool too deep.
The license of the generated code is up to the user (or whomever writes the templates). By default it's proprietary default copyright, i.e. you generate code, that's your code and you own it.
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Gopalakrishna Palem < notifications@github.com> wrote:
Quick question on this line. May be answered elsewhere, but just to confirm: the code generated by this tool - can be it used in some other license (say commercial or MIT etc.), or would it be covered by GPL?
Usually GPL does not cover the output of a program and IMO the output / code generated by this tool is free to be licensed under any license. But just want to reconfirm with the owners of this tool, before looking into it deep.
— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/imatix/gsl/issues/125#issuecomment-242889892, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASzCOPw2ONmvWN_LfoQZ3_3HuTGcH-2ks5qj54lgaJpZM4JqS3c .
What about adding a note about that in the readme to avoid any confusion? Or maybe even an explicit exception in the COPYING license file to make lawyers happy?
@hintjens - shall we make it consistent? If so, to GPL-3+ ?