In this post, tepples wrote:
On several other forums I used to be active on (pocketheaven, gbadev), there was seldom a new library release thread without constructive criticism about its license. From readme.txt:
I take it that was supposed to be a request, much like the "giftware" license of the Allegro library. Or is it a requirement? It's OK if it's a requirement as long as one can fulfill it by just publishing the source code of the modified compressor or decompressor; in that case, it acts like a weak copyleft like the Classpath license, MPL, or LGPL.
Quote:
Feel free to use this in your projects if you'd like. You can also modify the compressor or the decompressor if you think you can improve them in any way. I just ask that you let me know if you make any improvements to these programs.
I take it that was supposed to be a request, much like the "giftware" license of the Allegro library. Or is it a requirement? It's OK if it's a requirement as long as one can fulfill it by just publishing the source code of the modified compressor or decompressor; in that case, it acts like a weak copyleft like the Classpath license, MPL, or LGPL.
perhaps more like the cocos2d-iphone license's additions to LGPL than the vanilla LGPL though