>Oh god - I said I wouldn't get drawn into a licensing discussion here.. >Ok, this is my last post on the subject - I find writing code more >satisfying than discussing the finer philosophical points of it. me too, but your project is unusual in this regard, though far from unprecedented (Qt being the obvious prior art :). and since it represents the kind of stuff that many of us are interested in ... here we are :)) >I'm certainly not trying to exploit anyone here - this isn't i certainly wasn't trying to suggest that. i think that what you've done with JUCE is great and admirable. there's no reason other than good intent for you to have released this under the GPL, and i thank you for it. >big-business. Imagine if someone did write an entire linux audio/midi >system for me, and if I included it verbatim in Juce. It'd make up >perhaps 0.1% of the total code. So even if I sold as many as 100 the amount is irrelevant. my concern wasn't about someone getting rich from my work, it was about the principle of someone being able to use my work in a way that doesn't reciprocate in either an open-source/GPL or a financial way. i just see that as wrong even if the financial amounts would be small, but i don't require that people agree with me. --p "ardour ported to JUCE, coming ... not" :)
