While the application itself is likely to be GPL-3.0 by the time of the first release, I'd like to allow use of the text engine under a more permissive license.
The two main contenders for licensing are:
LGPL-3.0: Can use the library for any type of application, as long as the end user has the freedom to re-link with a modified version of the library. Source code must be provided.
MPL-2.0: Basically the above, with an exception for static linking.
Given that we're based on glib, which itself is LGPL, I'm not sure there's all that much benefit to using MPL-2.0. An additional upside of LGPL is we could then reuse code from GTK and/or Lasem.
The text engine component of bluetype has been split-off into mjakeman/text-engine, which is available under the MIT licence. Going forward, bluetype will likely be GPL3+.
While the application itself is likely to be
GPL-3.0
by the time of the first release, I'd like to allow use of the text engine under a more permissive license.The two main contenders for licensing are:
LGPL-3.0
: Can use the library for any type of application, as long as the end user has the freedom to re-link with a modified version of the library. Source code must be provided.MPL-2.0
: Basically the above, with an exception for static linking.Given that we're based on glib, which itself is LGPL, I'm not sure there's all that much benefit to using MPL-2.0. An additional upside of LGPL is we could then reuse code from GTK and/or Lasem.