I want to create native, MorphOS, open-source libraries. If I include the build files (modified to the specific library), can I publish them? And which license can I apply to the build files?

For instance, I want to port a BSD library, which comes with a BSD license. Do I have to omit, or add, the names of the library skeleton creators? If I add the names of the library skeleton creators to the BSD license, it makes the files and technique for building the library open-source.

I would like to make the source code of the build environment (modified skeleton files) available, so that other people can make changes to the library and recompile it.

If I would omit the build-environment files, no-one can make changes to the library.

So, what kind of mention would you like, "based on library skeleton written by XYZ" or a full-blown "MorphOS Library Skeleton Copyright (C) XYZ", or no mention at all? And if you wish to retain your copyright, can I add it to the BSD license? (Or into other licenses?)

That's a very important issue.

I need a clarification to avoid future complaints.

For now, I'll add a clause:

All parts pertaining to MorphOS library skeleton files may only be used for creating MorphOS software. All other uses are subject to clarification with the respective copyright holders.

into the BSD license, and

Based on library skeleton ABC, Copyright (C) by XYZ. All rights reserved. See LICENSE.txt for further information.

at the beginning of every file from the library skeleton. If that's not okay with you, let me know.

And what do I do with GNU licensed software? The GNU license requires that the result be open-sourced and that it cannot be put under a more restrictive license (which would prohibit the clause mentioned above). So, for GNU software, I would use two licenses, one for the build files, which would follow above mentioned scheme, and the GNU license for the core source files of the project.

Or is it possible to omit all mentioning of the skeleton code? After all, most likely, most of the code will be modified anyway beyond recognition. And the SDK would still be required to compile it.

Such issues should certainly be documented somewhere in the SDK to avoid confusion, and give developers a clear legal environment to work in.


[ Edited by voyager2007 on 2008/7/22 21:53 ]