License-related question about argtable3 HOT 4 CLOSED

@Kerl13 I don't understand the problem you face. Does it cause any trouble for you?

I'm not an expert in licenses, either. However, when I established Argtable3, one of the major goals is to get rid of LGPL, which is used by Argtable2 and not commercial-friendly. What I know is, all BSD-style licenses are commercial friendly, so I'm not sure what's the problem when different BSD-style licenses mixing together.

When I chose the getopt implementation from NetBSD, I just copied the source files without changing any license statement. I don't think it's a mistake, because I believe I should keep the original license statements.

If this license issue really concerns you, like what you've found, you can use your own getopt implementation by setting ARG_REPLACE_GETOPT. Thanks.

from argtable3.

I think BSD-style licenses are a great choice for argtable.

My only concern with the 4-clause BSD is that the (apparently controversial) 3rd clause, aka the "advertising" clause, makes it incompatible with the GPL. So I cannot use argtable3 as is if I also have GPL-licensed dependencies.

It would have been ideal not to have this clause in the NetBSD implementation, but I assume I'll have to use my getopt then 🤷‍♂️
Thanks for your answer anyway!

from argtable3.

I had a ticket long time ago about the same 4-clause BSD and GPL incompatibility issue. My solution is: use your own getopt implementation. However, since you are the second one mentioning this issue, I guess I need to switch to the FreeBSD implementation, which uses 2-clause BSD.

For now, maybe you can use the FreeBSD version by yourself.

from argtable3.

This would be a nice enhancement I think, thanks for considering it

from argtable3.