OSI Approval process

[Matthew Flaschen]

Daniel Corbe wrote:
> Once I have a usable systems framework I'll want to concentrate on writing
> applications which can make use of this work.  For this I will want to be a
> lot less permissive about sub-licensing code.  Mainly because it will be in
> a user-facing context as opposed to a developer-facing context.
> 
> I want the code to remain open,

Exactly what do you mean by "open" here?

> and I want the intent of the license to
> reflect free and unrestricted distribution of my code (which includes
> incorporation into commercial offerings).  This rules out the GPL as it
> violates the spirit of my intentions.

Of course, GPL allows interpretation into commercial offerings.  It
doesn't allow incorporation into proprietary offerings.  Which do you mean?

> I want something
> 
> A) Less permissive than the MIT/BSD license
> B) Something that is certainly a great deal clearer than the BSD license
> C) Something more permissive than the GPL.

Have you considered the LGPL?  It will allow you to keep the "library"
code open, but the overall work using the library can still be proprietary.

Matt Flaschen