LGPL3 License (unwanted?) side effects in Go

[cosmos72]

Using LGPL3 license for Go code results in some non-trivial restrictions due to Go using static linking by default and not supporting binary-only packages (see golang/go#28152)

I discussed the effects of LGPL3-ed Go in cosmos72/gomacro#14
In practice, it is almost equivalent to using GPL3 because the exception that you can link a LGPL3 library to a binary with a different license becomes extremely cumbersome to use in Go due to static linking.

Are you willing to consider a different license?

[codr7]

You have a point.

I'm quite fed up with licenses, really. They're most probably doing more harm than good from my perspective.

Do you have any objections to Public Domain (https://sqlite.org/copyright.html)?

[cosmos72]

Well, you could have objections to public domain, and also people potentially contributing to the project.

For my Go projects I chose MPL 2.0 as middle ground between LGPL and MIT, but if you have no problems with public domain, you may as well consider MIT license, which is used by the vast majority of Go projects - including the compiler and standard library

[codr7]

Aight, MIT it is then.

09f3ddd

[cosmos72]

You were fast :)
I was wrong: https://github.com/golang/go/blob/master/LICENSE seems to be actually a 3-clause BSD, but for practical purposes BSD and MIT should be basically equivalent:
I definitely remember reading them together as "MIT/BSD" quite often in license discussions for Go, where the writer(s) considered them as equivalent.

[codr7]

:) Like I said, I'm pretty sure by now the whole thing isn't leading anywhere. If we were to drop all licenses and just let people do more or less whatever they feel like to public code, I suspect the world would look mostly the same. /c7 Den mån 27 maj 2019 kl 17:54 skrev Massimiliano Ghilardi < notifications@github.com>:

…

You were fast :) I was wrong: https://github.com/golang/go/blob/master/LICENSE seems to be actually a 3-clause BSD, but for practical purposes BSD and MIT should be basically equivalent: I definitely remember reading them together as "MIT/BSD" quite often in license discussions for Go, where the writer considered them as equivalent. — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1?email_source=notifications&email_token=ALWHJMAEHOK3UX7BM6TO35LPXP74RA5CNFSM4HPZ54R2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWKDYIQ#issuecomment-496253986>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALWHJMCIMGOP4L664A3SZZDPXP74RANCNFSM4HPZ54RQ> .