Subject: [Fenics] GPL or LGPL for FEniCS Apps?

From: Harish Narayanan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:27:33 +0100

Dear FEniCS enthusiasts,

I am going to reiterate a concern that I tried to bring up earlier
regarding the copyright consent forms. Please chime in with your views.

I understand the rationale behind using LGPL for core FEniCS components
(e.g. DOLFIN and FFC). It makes sense to me that these projects could
form a part of future (potentially proprietary) applications. The
developers of such applications clearly have to bring in a lot of
domain-specific knowledge. I can see why they might want to keep such
knowledge proprietary, and I can see how moving to LGPL brings them into
the community at least as users of FEniCS.

But the same logic doesn't hold (in my mind) for FEniCS Apps. Some of
these function reasonably well and are already capable of solving select
domain-specific problems. Aren't they, in a sense, closer to complete,
immediately useful applications? Given this, does it make sense that
they too should be released under LGPL? What is then to prevent someone
from, say, slapping a GUI on a well-functioning solver and selling it as
a tool?

Harish

---

From: "Garth N. Wells" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:56:41 +0000

> from, say, slapping a GUI on a well-functioning solver and selling it as

I'm not sure what you're advocating. That FEniCS Apps should be GPL?

Garth

> Harish
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> Post to     : [email-masked]
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

---

From: Harish Narayanan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:08:14 +0100

> I'm not sure what you're advocating. That FEniCS Apps should be GPL?

Yes, or at least be left to the developer's choice. I am not keen on
past contributions to FEniCS Apps under GPL now suddenly being
transferred to LGPL.

Harish

---

From: "Garth N. Wells" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:11:26 +0000

> past contributions to FEniCS Apps under GPL now suddenly being

I'm perfectly happy with FEniCS Apps developers choosing for themselves
between GPL and LGPL. I thought that this was the present situation?

Garth

---

From: Harish Narayanan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:16:13 +0100

> between GPL and LGPL. I thought that this was the present situation?

That is not what the text of the copyright consent form suggests. I
would like if what you said was made more explicit.

Link for easy access:
http://www.fenicsproject.org/pub/copyright/forms/letter-author.pdf

Harish

---

From: "Garth N. Wells" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:18:26 +0000

> http://www.fenicsproject.org/pub/copyright/forms/letter-author.pdf

OK.

Since we don't distribute FEniCS Apps, I don't see why they've been
included on the consent form.

Garth

---

From: Anders Logg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:57:12 +0100

> included on the consent form.

FEniCS Apps is still a part of FEniCS so it's reasonable to include it
on the form. And it would have been good to bring this up before we
started sending out and collecting the forms.

There are a number of possibilities:

1. Allow FEniCS Apps to select either GPL or LGPL. In that case we can
construct an optional form for Harish.

2. Require that FEniCS Apps use LGPL as the rest of FEniCS. In that
case developers that object to the LGPL can take their projects
elsewhere (or rather keep them on Launchpad). The only difference
would be that they are not promoted as a FEniCS App from the FEniCS
web page.

3. Discontinue FEniCS Apps and don't require anything for the projects
currently part of FEniCS Apps. We could still have a page on
fenicsproject.org which linked to projects based on FEniCS. Since we
don't provide any infrastructure for the Apps (Launchpad does), the
difference would be small.

--
Anders

---

From: Kent-Andre Mardal <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:45:11 +0100

> difference would be small.
What happens with code from the apps that could/should be migrated back to
dolfin? Will that
be simple?

Kent

---

From: Anders Logg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:26:05 +0100

> What happens with code from the apps that could/should be migrated back to

Not unless the apps use LGPL. That's a good reason for having LGPL on
the Apps too.

Migration would still be possible if the authors of the code in the
App actively submit it to DOLFIN and they have agreed to LGPL for
their DOLFIN contributions (they are free to relicense the code
themselves). But in practice this would be difficult since the code in
the App might have been touched by others who then agreed to make
their changes under the GPL. One would then need to ask all those who
have touched the code in the App to agree to relicense under the LGPL.

--
Anders