"Yurii A. Rashkovskii" yrashk@fp.org.ua writes:
I'd prefer the license issues were settled before a hosting decision is made. We generally recommend MIT/BSD-style licenses, and LLGPL over GPL, but GPL is ok too.
Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "development engine". Is that another name for IDE, or something totally different?
Basically, it is a set of libraries to build frame and workflow-based applications atop of them and probably some tool applications inside (notsure yet).
Otherwise I approve -- pending the license.
Well, GPL seems to meet most of my requirements for licensing issues, so I'll prefer using it.
This means that you can't _use_ BSD code and distribute the result.
From section 2 of the GPL:
----- b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. -----
This means that you'll have to find a GPL'd compiler to target, and you'll only be able to use GPL'd libraries. The fact the lisp leaves you no option but to "link" directly to other code makes the GPL far more restrictive than it is for compile-edit-debug languages.
P.S. By the way, is there any way to use Arch revision system oncommon-lisp.net?
the following projects already do: ubf, bese and ucw. I'd be happy to give you a hand setting it up if need be.
Thanks in advance,Yurii.