MZan @mzan@qoto.org

@vermaden EUPL is a copyleft license, while BSD a permissive one. So they are very different.

EUPL is similar to a merge between LGPLv3+ and Affero GPL: like in Affero, if you use an EUPL library in a cloud service, you had to release improvements to the EUPL library under EUPL; but like in LGPL, you can maintain your product code propietary.

It is a rather clear license to read (simpler than the GPL), except the the differences between derivative-work and distinct product.

I'm writing this, because up to date EUPL is may favorite license :-)

@emilianosandri it is unrelated to the original suggestion, but I found very inspirational this blog post

https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2020/09/07/quare-freebsd/

@stefano @dgoodkin

@qwertz I agree.

In particular, I think that OSS suffers the lack of a user-community-way for funding the projects, i.e. an OSS-friendly way to support them with money. The developers are at risk of burnout, without economical benefits.

Hence, commercial companies, that have the money, can have a lot of influence (too much in case of hidden agenda) into many projects.

OSS was extremely successfull, but in real life, we need also money, not only code.

@stefano