![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/1ff5fc19fa77ab37e5f2773dd154d469.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
31 May
2013
31 May
'13
10:42 a.m.
On 05/31/2013 04:33 AM, Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira wrote:
What do you guys think about use a more permissive license (LGPLv2.1 and later, MIT, ...) for the library?
If you are writing this from scratch and seperating this into an isolated library, you could just dual-license it with a GPL variant and some sort of commercial license.
I do not like the idea of giving away work for commercial exploitation for free.
Regards, Sebastian