search

werner2101 / spicelib

Tools to collect and test spice models
http://www.h-renrew.de/h/spicelib/doc/index.html
BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License
34 stars 10 forks source link

Spicelib needs a license #2

Closed asomers closed 11 years ago

asomers commented 15 years ago

I think we should choose a license for spicelib. I have just copied some code from pylab, whose license is very permissive and is GPL-compatible. I have also copied ltcsplit.py, which is GPL-2. But ltcsplit.py is my own code and I can relicense it however I choose.

My opinion is that spicelib should have a permissive license. Since it only exists to support the FOSS simulators ngspice and gnucap, there isn't any danger of someone selling a closed source version. Then again, I suppose it's possible that someone would distribute spicelib, ngspice, and some schematic tool in a bundle. If that is a danger, then we should use a copyleft license.

What do you think?

werner2101 commented 15 years ago

[just added my comment to the tracker] I'm with you that spicelib should have a permissive licence. Maybe BSD-like.

Well, adding support for other simulator isn't that hard. The main work will be in the mapping definitions between model and symbol (the indexfiles). I think that work could be useful for others, too. Maybe even for the vendors of the models.

Currently, I've no clear opinion.