FIFE forums

FIFE Development => Framework development => Topic started by: mvBarracuda on January 07, 2008, 10:15:55 am

Title: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 07, 2008, 10:15:55 am
There were a number of legal issues we worried about recently:
- We were not sure if the number of used 3rd party libraries (and therefore the number of different licenses) caused a license clash (incompatible licenses).
- We were not sure if we could license the engine core (written in C++) under GPL while switching to LGPL for the engine extensions (which are written in Python).

Our motivation behind considering this switch is that the current GPL license for engine extensions would force game developers who use FIFE to put all their python code under GPL as well. As we assume that they'll write the majority of their game mechanics in python, that would surely be a drawback for indie developers who would need to allow others to use their gameplay code even if they created these engine extensions "from scratch".

An example would be an indie developer who writes his own maploader in python for his game. Even if he completely wrote it from scratch without using any of the existing maploader code he would still need put this maploader code under GPL as all Python code that works together with the engine core needs to be published under the same license.

We decided to get in contact with the software freedom law center (http://www.softwarefreedom.org/) (called "sflc" in the rest of this thread) to clear up our questions. I had the chance to attend a meeting with one of the sflc employers before christmas and here are the summarized results:
- All currently used licenses are compatible with each other, so there is at least no need to worry concerning this aspect.
- Assets (maps, audio files, video files, graphics) can be licensed differently; we would need to find a way to store dialogue text in separate files (not in the python ones) to ensure that dialogue text falls within the category of separate content. If dialogue text is stored in the Python files, it must be seen as engine extension code and therefore be published under GPL.
- The python extensions are a derivative work of the C++ engine core as SWIG parses the C++ code to create the wrapper files. Therefore engine core AND engine extensions need to get published under the same license at the moment.

So now we got a bunch of different options and I would like to have feedback from all developers what option they prefer:
1. Switch to LGPL for engine and extensions. Issue: some of the contributors prolly won't agree to this change; I remember that at least Chris (who wrote a fair share of the initial engine core code) didn't like the idea of switching to LGPL in the past.

2. Switch to GPL + exception (engine core gets licensed under GPL, introducing exception that the engine extensions get licensed differently). This option was proposed by the sflc employer. We would keep the engine core under GPL but add an exception to the license to ensure that game developers could publish their engine extensions under a different license. The sflc would help us with the wording of this exception to ensure that we don't run into legal issues. We don't know if all contributors would agree to moving to such a modified license though it seems more likely than a complete change to LGPL to me.

3. Last but not least we could simply stick to GPL for engine core and the extensions in case we feel that a switch process is not worth all the hassle. Indie developers could be scared by GPL for the engine core as well and would favour writing their own engine instead so do we really increase the attractiveness of FIFE for indie developers by just changing the license of the engine extension code?

As this is one of the most important decisions (prolly along the lines of switching from Lua to Python scripting) I would appreciate every feedback concerning it. If you need more information to make an informed decision, every developer (not only the currently active ones!) can get access to the whole log of the conversation with the sflc employer. I am not allowed to post it at the forums in public as the sflc asked me to just send it to developers in personal.

Feedback please :-)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: MuteX on January 07, 2008, 10:48:22 am
Hey!

Well, in general, I'd always prefer the GPL, especially with Open Source projects. But we really have to take a closer look of WHAT we produce with FIFE. It's a game engine, which is going to be professional and very interesting for indie developers. Furthermore, those developers want to sell their products. Together with a straight GPL license, it'll be hard for them to do so. So my opinion is that using the LGPL won't be that wrong.. People who're interested in the engine can still get its sources, and I'm pretty sure there'll be more than one developer who'll create some Open Source game or related, so that people can learn from that. The big adventage of using a LGPL is just that we extend the amount -- and especially type -- of people reached. Not only FOSS developers, but also indie ones -- or maybe some other companies.

In short terms: Option 1. ;)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: neurogeek on January 07, 2008, 11:01:26 am
Hi,

   IMO, I'd stick to #2. GPL + exception for contents and extensions seems reasonably good as GPL gives FIFE a continuity over time plus the fact that it can stay OpenSource in the future and another license for both contents and extensions would allow devs to close their creations (complete games based on FIFE) on closed code. As I see it, game creation is for fun and profit and OpenSource games are not ready to be commercially successful by their own if not joined by a strong market support. This means nobody would use FIFE outside fun/research activities dropping FIFE appeal significantly if it stayed completely GPL.

   Allowing aside GPL licenses on game contents and game extensions is a great way to give FIFE some more popularity.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: anxs on January 07, 2008, 02:32:42 pm
Hi,

also in my opinion #2 is the best solution. An exception to allow game devs to publish their content and engine extensions under a different license makes it possible to use FIFE for both free and commercial projects.
I don't see any reason for switching to LGPL. If any commercial project will have to improve the FIFE core they can simply contribute to the original FIFE instead of publishing an own version. (As LGPL will force them to publish the sources for the modificated one)

Greetings,
anxs
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Joshdan on January 07, 2008, 04:03:21 pm
What are the practical differences between LGPL and modified GPL?  The only one I can think of is additional difficulty if we want to directly incorporate some LGPL code (or vice-versa).

I imagine anyone philosophically opposed to LGPL would equally opposed to an exception that would allow commercial use of the FIFE library.  Also, both options would prevent us from using stock GPL code.

I think I lean slightly toward GPL.  I'd consider it a small plus to have commercial use of FIFE under near-GPL terms, but the GPL actually gives us more flexibility about what we can include in our own project.  I would be happy to contribute to the project either way.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 10, 2008, 08:33:59 am
I think I lean slightly toward GPL.  I'd consider it a small plus to have commercial use of FIFE under near-GPL terms, but the GPL actually gives us more flexibility about what we can include in our own project.  I would be happy to contribute to the project either way.
The additional advantage of being able to utilize GPLed code in FIFE in case we stick to GPL is a very good point Joshdan! We should consider this point when it comes to deciding about a possible license switch.

I spoke to our first lead programmer Chris yesterday who contributed a fair share of code to FIFE. He said that although he personally strongly prefers the current GPL licensing, we wouldn't block a decision to switch to GPL + exception or even LGPL in case the other programmers agree as well :-)

As we're utilizing quite a number of 3rd party libraries for FIFE, I'll check if switching to option 1 or 2 could bring up any clash license issues. Stay tuned :-)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: November on January 10, 2008, 03:43:29 pm
I'm not a member of the project, but still, I wanted to share my two cents : Is it important to take a decision now or soon ?
I suppose switching to LGPL is not a reversible process, and therefore the final decision (but not the discussion) of switching to it should be post poned to as late as possible. But maybe I am missing something :P
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: skybound on January 10, 2008, 05:12:58 pm
November: Changing a license requires all contributors to agree to the change; the longer you wait the more code gets written under the old license. So doing it as late as possible makes it harder (because there might be more people involved).


I guess I made my position clear before, but to leave no doubt: I am fine with a change to either GPL + exception or LGPL for any of my code that might still be in there; whatever the majority decides.


mvBarracuda: Could you please forward the email from the sflc? I wonder how this GPL + exception stuff can work (the way I read GPL section 2.b I would assume it breaks the license, but obviously the sflc guys know better).
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Sleek on January 11, 2008, 02:52:54 am
As long as the license allows me to

1) distribute the code for free & without limitation

2) access to any files I have contributed to

I will accept it.

Also, I would love an optional condition

3) being able to link to fife library with an option for me not to have to reveal the rest of my client's code ( for at least 5 years ). I will still need to publish any modification to the engine. LGPL sounds right.

I love GPL, but when the public manages to get at least one person to compile the open source code for them, almost all of them will go for the free version. I respect people who wants to learn (the code), but not freeloaders. My 2 cents ;)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: phoku on January 12, 2008, 09:01:45 am
Hi there =)

I am fine with all the given options and have no problems with relicencing.

Personally I think that going all LGPL would fit best, but well whatever makes
your day *g*

-phoku
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: jasoka on January 12, 2008, 09:28:06 am
Shortly: All given options are ok for me as well
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Joshdan on January 12, 2008, 01:51:00 pm
I suppose switching to LGPL is not a reversible process.

Actually going from GPL to LGPL like we are trying to do now is the hard direction, requiring approval from everyone as skybound noted.  Going from LGPL to GPL can legally be done on a whim (though practically it would involve a discussion like the current thread). 
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: November on January 13, 2008, 09:46:42 am
Actually going from GPL to LGPL like we are trying to do now is the hard direction, requiring approval from everyone as skybound noted.  Going from LGPL to GPL can legally be done on a whim (though practically it would involve a discussion like the current thread). 

But wouldn't switching from LGPL to GPL involve that all the extensions and clients built on top of the engine couldn't use it anymore, unless by also switching to GPL ? I think this makes this process also very complicated. If third parties develop their own engine extensions and clients (be it under LGPL or anything else) and don't want to license them under GPL, for example.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 13, 2008, 02:41:09 pm
But wouldn't switching from LGPL to GPL involve that all the extensions and clients built on top of the engine couldn't use it anymore, unless by also switching to GPL ? I think this makes this process also very complicated. If third parties develop their own engine extensions and clients (be it under LGPL or anything else) and don't want to license them under GPL, for example.
They would at least need to switch to GPL if they would like to use the newer FIFE versions that would have been released after switching to GPL. But they can of course continue to use the LGPLed FIFE code and fork it.

However a switch from LGPL back to GPL is only a theoretical option and I don't think that any active FIFE developer is an advocate of this proposal.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 17, 2008, 07:13:30 pm
I did send a mail to all developers who contributed code to FIFE (the SVN logs has been analyzed for this purpose) and asked them how they feel about such a possible license change. No reply yet but I'll let you know as soon as somebody replied.

On a related note: would you mind if we fill the AUTHORS file that can be found in trunk/docs with the aliases of the actual developers and add their mail addresses there as well? This would really ease getting in contact with all contributors in the future.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mortiz on January 18, 2008, 10:13:47 am
I'm really easy on the issue myself, from reading all the options though probably #2 stands out the most.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: shales on January 18, 2008, 12:36:04 pm
I'm fine with all the options as well..
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 23, 2008, 05:39:27 am
A little status update concerning the license switch proposal. The following contributors did reply and expressed in some way that they at least agree to a LGPL switch or the GPL + exception license:
aldart
Anchorite
anxs
cheesesucker
chewie
chris
donbachi
jasoka
joshdan
jwt
mortiz
mutex
mvbarracuda
neurogeek
novade
ottar
phoku
prock
RogerWilco
Shadowdancer
shales
skybound
sleek
tesseract
virus
zahlman
zbyte64

The following people did neither answer here at the forums nor replied to my mails yet and will therefore receive another mail:
hahasound
ifoobar
ismarc
labrat
stro
undeadinsanity
vovansim

Code of these people who haven't replied yet does still reside in SVN trunk:
ifoobar (MSVC-specific compiler defines)
undeadinsanity (screenshot functionality)
vovansim (vfs zip support, unit tests, build scripts)

Caution: this list was compiled from the top of my head. In case I've listed anyone in the wrong category please reply here or send me a mail. I'll update this post of the next time to reflect the current situation.

EDIT: _virus__ agreed to it on IRC.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Tesseract on January 23, 2008, 07:50:31 am
Hmm, I'm not sure any of the code I wrote is even left in the current version, but since my opinion was asked…  ;D

Of the two possible changes, LGPL seems like the simplest and safest. A GPL exception would have to be very carefully worded in order to get the desired effect without any unwanted side-effects.

A few additional comments:
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Shadowdancer on January 23, 2008, 12:45:53 pm
Since my single contribution isn't even part of the development trunk, I don't mind.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Wuntvor on January 25, 2008, 03:29:07 pm
For me, the more freedom for developers the better, so I'd be all for LGPL if possible.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on January 25, 2008, 03:30:25 pm
mvBarracuda: Could you please forward the email from the sflc? I wonder how this GPL + exception stuff can work (the way I read GPL section 2.b I would assume it breaks the license, but obviously the sflc guys know better).
Sorry, I overlooked your post :-/

Just sent the mail to you :-)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: chewie on January 28, 2008, 05:03:27 am
I would prefer a license which allows developers to hold back certain parts of their (own) code - if they wish to do so. On the other hand I´d like to see FIFE itself under GPL ...

Especially when it comes to the commercial use of FIFE (by "independent" developers) there must be a way for the company to ensure that the product is bought instead of downloaded.*

So #2 would be a good solution. :)

* I believe that FIFE can push the market of independent 2D isometric games and can help small teams to bring their ideas onto the screen. Last but not least I see a chance to get more native games for Linux (both commercial and freeware / OSS). ;-)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: donbachi on February 10, 2008, 02:32:39 pm
Hi all,

as my contributions so far have been very, very small, I can go with any of the propoded options.
From a more logical point of view, option #2 sounds the most reasonably for me.
But again, I'm fine with any of them.


Bye,

    donbachi
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: quasius on February 24, 2008, 12:16:12 pm
Consider me an indie developer who is interested in FIFE and would gladly contribute any core-engine enhancements I will probably make.  Unfortunately, I'll have to pass on FIFE altogether if I can only release my product under the GPL.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on February 24, 2008, 02:34:06 pm
Welcome to the forums quasius :-)

Your statement was a good reminder that I should actually update this thread with the current status of the license switch process. I did try to get in contact with all developers who contributed code to FIFE in the last weeks; unfortunately I wasn't able to reach all of them with the contact information they provided.

The following developers haven't replied to my mails yet:
hahasound
ifoobar
ismarc
labrat
stro
undeadinsanity
vovansim

While all of them contributed code to the project, the code of some contributors is not present anymore in trunk. So what is left and would need to get removed if we want to switch to the LGPL?

1. Screenshot functionality originally implemented by undeadinsanity. Jasoka mentioned that the current code in place might be inspired by popular textbook examples. In this case we would just need to remove the custom code that was written by undeadinsanity I guess.

Changesets of undeadinsanity:
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/search?q=undeadinsanity&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on

2. A couple of unit tests and zip support. Both has been implemented by vovansim. The old zip code was recently replaced by a new implementation written by chris. So we won't need to worry about reimplementing this functionality anymore. I'm not sure which unit tests have been written by Vovansim so this might be worth investigating. While rewriting these unit tests from scratch is surely quite some work, it sounds like we're able to tackle this in a reasonable timespan.

Changesets of vovansim:
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/search?q=vovansim&noquickjump=1&ticket=on&changeset=on&wiki=on

My personal proposal for the next steps:
1. Try to find an alternative way to contact vovansim & undeadinsanity; might be possible with social engineering. I can take care of that.
2. In case we're not able to reach them in a period of two weeks: identify and document the contributions of vovansim & undeadinsanity. Furthermore document if their code is still in place. Find out what parts of the screenshot code are taken from free sample implementations.
3. Create trac tickets to reimplement the documented functionality that is still in place from these two contributors.
4. Release FIFE 2008.1 under LGPL :-)

Hopefully that works out like planned.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: quasius on February 24, 2008, 03:43:41 pm
Well, it sounds like you might be on track to update the license then.  Based on that, I'll probably start poking around the FIFE code.  If you don't end up switching, I'll have to drop it and go back to Torque or something; but this engine is far more specific to what I need, so I'd like to use it.
Hopefully the switch goes well, as I'd be glad to redistribute any core engine improvements I'd need to make in exchange for being able to sell a FIFE game commercially.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: Sadr on February 28, 2008, 05:13:08 pm
Ehm, I'm probably not gonna be contributing any content that will be going under a license anyhow, but sure, you got my consent ;)

(...)
Especially when it comes to the commercial use of FIFE (by "independent" developers) there must be a way for the company to ensure that the product is bought instead of downloaded.
(...)
Are you guys planning to make FIFE a commercial product?
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: snowball on February 29, 2008, 12:09:03 am
Quote
Are you guys planning to make FIFE a commercial product?

No, Zero will be free of charge. But there can always be developers like quasius who want to sell their games.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on March 18, 2008, 07:38:34 pm
I did try to reach the developers who didn't reply to the license change proposal mails yet. Unfortunately none of them replied :-/ It seems that code of the following developers still resides in trunk:
1. Vovansim: C++ boost unit tests
2. Arron / undeadinsanity: screenshot code (might be based on some book examples and he might therefore not hold any copyright on this implementation)

My personal proposal is:
1. Create trac tickets to remove / replace the mentioned functionality (done)
2. Send out a final license change agreement email and wait until the developers have agreed to the change
3. Actually remove vovansim's & arron's code
4. Ship the 2008.1 release under LGPL

As far as I can tell all developers would be fine with both license proposals (GPL + exception & LGPL) but the majority of the active developers seems to favour the LGPL because of its clarity. If nobody objects I'll word a final license change email that states that we want to switch to LGPL and asks for the agreement of all developers who contributed code to the project.

Tickets for removing / reimplementing code by developers who haven't agreed to the license switch proposal:
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/ticket/309
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/ticket/310
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on April 01, 2008, 10:16:51 am
A little update concerning the LGPL license switch. The following people have agreed to the license switch by sending an agreement via email:
- Cheesesucker
- donbachi
- Jasoka
- Joeh
- jwt
- Mutex
- NikN
- Ottar
- Phoku
- Plcstpierre
- RogerWilco
- Shadowdancer
- shales
- Skybound
- Tesseract
- Tuxdev

I'll wait until the weekend and send out another mail to the developers who haven't replied to my mail yet.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: niksha on April 29, 2008, 10:47:47 am
Can someone please clarify that LGPL jargon into few simple lines? :P

Seriously though, I am way too late to this discussion but I am on the same boat as quasius. I have been checking FIFE again and again for some time now (try years) but license has always been a pain. Now that's it's changed, I have some questions:

1) We can sell it (the game, without bundeling the FIFE app with the package) without releasing our 'own' work (code, art, sounds, etc.) to the public, right?

2) We will have to release any modification to FIFE itself to the public (I am more than ok with this one, the only thing I am worried about is releasing the custom code for the game itself).


That's pretty much it. I have always been impressed by the screenshot section for FIFE, the license always scared me away from the downloads section though..
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on April 30, 2008, 02:12:58 am
Can someone please clarify that LGPL jargon into few simple lines? :P
Sure :-)

1) We can sell it (the game, without bundeling the FIFE app with the package) without releasing our 'own' work (code, art, sounds, etc.) to the public, right?
Yes and no. With the current GPL licensing you can publish "assets" (graphics, sounds, music, movies) under a separate license. However all code that you write needs to get published under GPL 2.0 at the moment. That means everyone can use your code under this license and could resell it as well as long as he does so under the GPL 2.0 though that's highly unlikely as nobody is allowed to resell your assets.

2) We will have to release any modification to FIFE itself to the public (I am more than ok with this one, the only thing I am worried about is releasing the custom code for the game itself).
ATM you need to publish all your code under GPL; that means C++ & Python code. With the planned LGPL license you still need to publish all changes that you applied to the files that ship with FIFE under LGPL. However you'll be allowed to:
1. Link your custom C++ code against libFIFE without needing to publish your custom code under LGPL.
2. Write own Python scripts that import FIFE python scripts without needing to publish your scripts under LGPL.

Both isn't possible with the current GPL license in place so these are two of the reasons why we plan to ship our next release under LGPL.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: niksha on April 30, 2008, 06:05:31 am
Ok, thanks for the reply. I can atleast now start using the app and wait for the next update as well :)

Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: BenT on May 05, 2008, 08:40:19 pm
Can I get clarification on the license switch please? Has it happened yet? If not, does it look like it will not occur. I am currently looking at using FIFE on a project for the upcoming OpenPandora handset and need to get things sorted out.

Thanks,
BenT
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on May 06, 2008, 11:21:57 am
Hello Bent.

The license switch is still an ongoing procedure. I've just recently received another agreement mail but there are still 16 people who haven't sent their final agreement yet.

Not all of them have contributed code that is still left in trunk so here's a list of important people who haven't replied yet:
- Chris *
- Joshdan *
- Mortiz *
- Sleek *
- Arron
- Vovansim
- Vja *
- Zbyte64 *

The people with a * have agreed to the license change proposal in the past but didn't actually reply to the final license change mail yet. As they basically agreed to both proposals (LGPL or GPL + exception) in the past I don't intend to wait for their replies in case we could ship the release. So the only real remaining showstoppers are vovansim's & arron's code.

The code of both does currently get replaced with alternative implementations by other programmers. However we're quite short of resources so it might take some time until the new code can be found in SVN. Furthermore I'm currently taking a break from the project to sort out my university problems so I don't have much time on my hands to run after the people who haven't agreed yet.

The next release 2008.1 will definately be shipped under the LGPL 2.1 but we can't say when this release will be ready. Hopefully some time in the next 4 months but as we're short of resources I can't promise anything. In case you haven't read the article yet, here is a little summarization why FIFE is currently progressing rather slow:
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/wiki/2008/05/01/09.02
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on June 08, 2008, 04:45:20 pm
Another little update about the current status. The following developers recently agreed to the license switch proposal mail:
- Chris
- Joshdan
- Sleek

The only code from a developer who hasn't agreed in any way to the license change are the unit tests that have been written by vovansim. But there's is good news: vtchill does currently port nikn's unittest++ tests to linux so we could hopefully replace the old unit tests rather soon and release the next FIFE milestone under LGPL 2.1 :-)
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on June 15, 2008, 05:42:52 pm
Yet another little update! Mortiz agreed to the license switch proposal as well and the end of the road is in sight :-)

Just got the new unittest++ unittests working with mingw today and as soon as we throw out / replace the old boost unittests, we could adjust the file headers and release FIFE under LGPL! I think replacing the unittests shouldn't take more than two weeks in case we find enough developers who could test and adjust the tests for the different supported platforms / compilers.

Just one question left: should we release a new FIFE version as soon as the switch happened or should we simply adjust the file headers in SVN and write a little news posting that FIFE is officially LGPL software now but not ship the 2008.1 release before the new rio de hola game is ready?

I propose to tag the last GPL revision in SVN so everyone could easily access the old GPLed code as well for whatever reasons there may be to do so. Feedback please.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: niksha on June 18, 2008, 02:10:05 am
I am all for releasing it the moment the switch is made as long as you guys are sure you aren't really rushing anything.
Title: Re: FIFE legal issues - license switch and other possible options
Post by: mvBarracuda on July 13, 2008, 06:26:19 am
It's done! FIFE is officially released under LGPL 2.1 or newer new. File headers have been adjusted though there are some remaining issues related to the unittests but they didn't block the license switch itself:
http://mirror1.cvsdude.com/trac/fife/engine/changeset/2502

We'll consider putting together a little release in the next days that will simply feature a snapshot of the now LGPL'ed trunk. This will be no full-featured release (it won't contain a polished demo game) but it's meant for the users who want to get their hands on a LGPL version of FIFE as soon as possible. Stay tuned.