[Bf-committers] cycles GPLed or BSD?

[Aurel W.]

> The widespread interrpetation is that it's not legal to link GPL code into
> the same address space as non-GPL (propritary) code. If allowing non-GPL
> projects to use the renderer is important, one common way to solve this is
> to put the entire codebase under the LGPL. The LGPL is basically like the
> GPL for the library itself, but it allows linking an embedding that library
> into other codebases without requiring those codebases be GPL.
>
> It's also fine to leave it GPL, but like other GPL code, it will not be
> something commercial software can link into the address space. It will
> require a network/filesystem interface API so as to talk to it without being
> in the same address space.

It would be better to keep the main code base GPLed and have the API
and other parts, which are necessary to interface cycles under LGPL or
a BSD like licence. This is because, there is a lot of useful GPL
code, which could be used in cycles, but you can't relicense this with
the LGPL. I am mainly talking about pbrt here ;)