[ccan] licensing

[Sam Watkins]

hello again.

Most CPAN modules are availabe under a liberal "Artistic" license, which
is not copyleft.  CPAN and perl are successful because we can use most
any CPAN module in any commercial or open-source project.

As you know, that is not the case with GPL licensed libraries.  They
cannot be used with a proprietary licensed product, and they cannot be
used with an open-source project if the license is not GPL-compatible.

Is there any chance you'd consider shifting all of CCAN
to be at least as liberal as the LGPL?

My preference for licensing is public domain / CC0, MIT, BSD, LGPL in
that order.  LGPL is harmful but tolerable.  Viral copyleft like the GPL
is no good for a library of reusable code.

I've been on this list for a long time, watching progess with interest,
but I have never used CCAN, nor contributed anything, because you appear
to be using the GPL by preference.


Sam