> 1. Programs communicating by CORBA are separate programs, and so the > license won't matter. It doesn't seem like this will change soon. So > people can write replacements for any of the Piper parts if they want. Oh > well, that was a design choice, right? I still think it is a good one to > allow people to rewrite sections in a language independent manner. So we > shouldn't worry about this. You're right, the only thing I was a bit worried was that it would change in later versions of the (L)GPL. > 2. Then I guess all we have to worry about is free versus non-free > plugins. If we want people to be able to write non-free plugins that link > with Piper, we should go for the LGPL, if not the GPL is our choice. It's not as simple as that. You can link a closed-source program with an LGPL library, but whether you can link the library (libdata-flow) to a closed source plugin (library) is unclear. Remember that although libkdeui was LGPL, you still couldn't link it to Qt when it was QPL (at least not within the KDE context). > 3. I think we should have one license for every part (as long as everyone > can agree). This will make things a whole lot clearer about this issue. Do you want "one license for every part" or the same license for all the parts, it's unclear to me? Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin Universite de Sherbrooke - Genie Electrique valj01 at gel.usherb.ca