License about powellopt HOT 4 OPEN

That's unfortunate. This code has been circulating for years with Powell's original notices such as "There are no restrictions on or charges for the use of the software". I always took this as a permissive license. LGPL is a big restriction. There are many users that will not be able to use it under that license.

from powellopt.

Hi, @jacobwilliams !

That's unfortunate.

It is hard to comment on this. The license was a choice made by Professor Powell before he passed away, and he was the author.

This code has been circulating for years with Powell's original notices such as "There are no restrictions on or charges for the use of the software". I always took this as a permissive license.

It is true that Professor Powell did not choose a license when the code was initially circulated. However, in April 2015, as one of his last decisions, Professor Powell licensed all his code under LGPL. I guess it was his right to do so. A side note is that your repository was set up in July 2015.

There are many users that will not be able to use it under that license.

I feel sorry about this fact. But I also respect the choice that Professor Powell made because he was the (sole) author of the code.

Thank you very much!

Best regards,
Zaikun

from powellopt.

I think once code is released under a liberal license, the license cannot later be made more restrictive. If software is written that incorporates the code, the author of the original code does not have the power to retroactively change the license of all derivative products. There was a discussion Open source library, can the project owner change the license to be more restrictive? where the same view was stated.

from powellopt.

I think once code is released under a liberal license, the license cannot later be made more restrictive. If software is written that incorporates the code, the author of the original code does not have the power to retroactively change the license of all derivative products. There was a discussion Open source library, can the project owner change the license to be more restrictive? where the same view was stated.

Various opinions exist concerning this point. I am not a lawyer or judge so it is hard to tell which one is lawful. I just would like to make one point clear in case others have not noticed it:

Professor Powell licensed all his code with LGPL in April 2015.

Thanks.

from powellopt.