[Bf-committers] Can BGE be relicensed?

[Sinan Hassani]

You can only link closed source code dynamically with LGPL. Most mobile 
app stores require everything to be statically linked anyway, so LGPL is 
not going to help. Your code effectively becomes GPL in the technical 
sense. We want the LGPL for app stores because it has less restrictions 
on distribution, see original post for why it works.

You can also read the press release from VLC on why they went LGPL:

Link: http://www.videolan.org/press/lgpl.html

Part of the reason is for the VLC media player to be more multi-platform.

PC stores allow for dynamic linking of code, so you can integrate 
something like FMOD there using dynamic linking if you want, but you 
still need to release source code for all the FMOD code you added to BGE 
(i.e. code change and FMOD API calls). This is the case for this FMOD 
example if BGE is GPL or LGPL.

So we're asking for a license change only in certain cases of 
distribution. We're asking only for a license change when BGE is given 
to a third party repository for redistribution, in which case it would 
be available under LGPL.

I think the LGPL is the best choice here, given that BGE is so 
integrated with Blender, going for a more liberal license would not 
work. We need a license that is both open source and free software.

Sinan

On 12-12-01 10:28 AM, Antony Riakiotakis wrote:
> There's quite some difference between LGPL and GPL. LGPL allows the
> source to be linked to closed code. Some of the developers are
> actually not very friendly with this idea, not to mention being
> friendly with Apple when it comes to 'walled gardens', monopolies,
> patents etc. So combining the two, and proposing a licence change with
> an air of "someone has done it, you HAVE to do it too" and with MAYBE
> the promise of it then being allowed in the Apple store is not the
> best diplomatic move you could do.