On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Paul Davis <paul@linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Iain Duncan <iainduncanlists@gmail.com> wrote:

> HI Dave, I would def be more interested in checking it out if it were LGPL
> or MIT or somesuch. As I'm sure you know, Csound went LGPL a number of years
> ago now, and that definitely increased uptake in the long run. Like Harry, I
> just never know what use I might put some code to, so have a bit of a
> kneejerk be-careful reaction to GPL.

just to be clear, CSound went LGPL *from* the ridiculous "MIT
educational license". that was a license that made its source code all
but unusable (and at the very least, extremely unclear as to its
usability).

Yes, the old csound license was a source of pain and agnst for sure. I just meant to point out that LGPL was chosen specifically so that the engine & new API could be used in commercial products, and I think that has been a really good move. I'm sure that the csound~ object for Max resulted in a lot of interest, and I expect Csound For Live to do the same.

iain