Skip to main content
Software Engineering

Return to Answer

MS-PL instead of MPL
Source Link
Apalala
Apalala
  • 2.3k
  • 13
  • 19

I wrote about interpreting software licenses a while ago. You might find that helpful.

As I see it, the MPLMS-PL is a fairly simple open/source license. It is OSI-aproved, which makes it compatible with most FOSS licenses, except the GPL, because the GPL is viral and requires availability of source, and the MPLMS-PL is viral if source code is distributed.

I wrote about interpreting software licenses a while ago. You might find that helpful.

As I see it, the MPL is a fairly simple open/source license. It is OSI-aproved, which makes it compatible with most FOSS licenses, except the GPL, because the GPL is viral and requires availability of source, and the MPL is viral if source code is distributed.

I wrote about interpreting software licenses a while ago. You might find that helpful.

As I see it, the MS-PL is a fairly simple open/source license. It is OSI-aproved, which makes it compatible with most FOSS licenses, except the GPL, because the GPL is viral and requires availability of source, and the MS-PL is viral if source code is distributed.

Source Link
Apalala
Apalala
  • 2.3k
  • 13
  • 19

I wrote about interpreting software licenses a while ago. You might find that helpful.

As I see it, the MPL is a fairly simple open/source license. It is OSI-aproved, which makes it compatible with most FOSS licenses, except the GPL, because the GPL is viral and requires availability of source, and the MPL is viral if source code is distributed.