Re: Whats the verdict on Cocoaruby from others ?

FROM : Jakob Olesen
DATE : Mon Jul 17 23:42:54 2006

On 17/07/2006, at 23.08, Sherm Pendley wrote:

> It's a young project. Give 'em time. That sounds quite similar to 
> my first CamelBones release too. Basic message forwarding came 
> first, then runtime integration later.


Yes, I am sure things will improve.

>

>> Oh, and it is LGPL.

>
> I'm curious - are you saying that's a pro or a con? I chose the 
> LGPL for my CamelBones bridge too. I made the choice of LGPL over 
> the GPL specifically to limit the "viral" aspects of the license to 
> the bridge code itself. It will not "infect" your app. I want my 
> code to stay free, but your code is your business - maybe 
> literally! :-)
>
> I'm not asking this to get into a flamewar. If my choice of LGPL is 
> limiting my potential audience, I'd certainly consider changing it 
> - it's a pragmatic issue for me, not a religion.


This is a sensitive topic, no flames, please.

For a mature library, LGPL is fine. I am not sure what license libc 
and libgcc use these days, but I don't care, because I don't have to 
change them.

For something like rubycocoa, I would have to make a lot of changes 
before using it. I would have to make those changes public. That is a 
nuisance, but not a big problem.

I would also have to link it dynamically, typically as a framework. 
This is a matter of taste, but I don't like it.

http://www.wilshipley.com/blog/2005/11/frameworks-are-teh-suck-err.html

I don't want to go into politics, but LGPL is a con for me. You have 
limited your audience :-)