Locians, I'm sure you know that Loci/TULIP is supposed to be licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL). But there is also the LGPL or Library GPL. What is the major difference between these two? Why does the LGPL exist? It turns out that the wording of the GPL prevents programs licensed as such from being incorporated into non-free or proprietary programs (GPL says that any project that extends the work covered by GPL must also be GPL). And this would cover links to any library. So, legally, one cannot connect a proprietary program to a GPL program. If you guys have been following the debate over KDE and GNOME, this is at the heart of the issue: KDE is GPL, but Qt (the library) is owned by Troll, which is "illegal". So, what about Loci? If we use GPL, can just anyone link their apps into it, as we intended? No. But this is where the LGPL comes in. Knowing how restrictive it would be licensing libraries under GPL, GNU/FSF made the LGPL. This simply removes the clause in GPL that all programs that link to the library/program be free too. All other aspects of the GPL remain. GTK and GNOME, by the way, are LGPL. But using LGPL doesn't mean your program is a library. GNU/FSF is actually going to change the name of LGPL to "Lesser GPL". Therefore, I think we should license Loci under LGPL. This is an important issue to settle now, even though Loci is vaporware, because the source code will be available as soon as it is written. For example, Thomas's sequence editor is somewhat non-vapor. The good news is, Harry, tacg won't have to be GPL to be "a part of" Loci. We wrote before about tacg's license, how it restricts commercial use/distribution. Jeff -- J.W. Bizzaro Phone: 617-552-3905 Boston College mailto:bizzaro at bc.edu Department of Chemistry http://www.uml.edu/Dept/Chem/Bizzaro/ --