The GPL license is restrictive, any code that is added to the project cannot be distributed without also giving access to the source code. An argument for choosing this license might be that the development at HSR is funded by public money, and therefore it should be ensured that access to improvements is always available.
The MIT license is permissive, so anything is allowed as long as the copyright owner and the license is mentioned. An argument for choosing this license is that it should help as many people as possible, even if they'd build a product around it and not share the improvements with the community.
dbrgn
commented
10 years ago
I think there are two main choices:
The GPL license is restrictive, any code that is added to the project cannot be distributed without also giving access to the source code. An argument for choosing this license might be that the development at HSR is funded by public money, and therefore it should be ensured that access to improvements is always available.
The MIT license is permissive, so anything is allowed as long as the copyright owner and the license is mentioned. An argument for choosing this license is that it should help as many people as possible, even if they'd build a product around it and not share the improvements with the community.
I'm OK with both of them :)
@cfaessler @d22 RFC!