Source Code released!

[Wiering]

Sorry for going on about this, but I would really like to urge you to reconsider the licensing for this project and change it to something less restrictive (like the zlib license, used by box2d).

I know most people probably won't be bothered about this, but to me any LGPL library is absolutely unusable for (serious) Android projects. Since APK files contain a compiled version of the library, the LGPL requires you to also distribute the source code of the library along with your program (see http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html).

I think the LGPL license will turn down many future developers from using your engine and cause endless discussions on the forum (like with http://libsdl.org, just search for lgpl in the forum).

[Mimminito]

I did not know about that! Well, hopefully something can be arranged so that its changed.

[valentin.milea]

LPGL is cumbersome for commercial development, which is why pretty much all popular libs switched to BSD/MIT/Apache license -- ogre3d, cocos2d, libgdx, rokon, box2d, you name it...

[Nicolas Gramlich]

Hi guys,

actually I don't want the license 'standing' between you and your projects, so as long as you don't secretly make an AndEngine2++ and sell it I'm totally fine with whatever you the (unchanged) andengine.jar for (keep in mind that a private branch always includes the 'stupid-fees').
Mentioning that you were using AndEngine and placing a link to the AndEngine-sources (and maybe the andengine.jar you used to compile the apk) on your project homepage is just fine.

"What grew in AndEngine stays in AndEngine." - All I basically want is that I'll get the attribution for what I spent pretty much time on.

Best Regards,
Nicolas

[valentin.milea]

Based on what you're describing, you want EPL/MPL. Ed Burnette points out the main differences here:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/howto-pick-an-open-source-license-part-1/130

[delirium83]

This topic has not been posted in for a while, but I think the issue still remains.

As for LGPL: As far as I know, as soon as you pack AndEngine with your Game (which obviously you need to do in order to use it for marketplace apps), LGPL forces you to publish your code. I think this will keep almost every commercial app developer from using your engine.
One thing I am not 100% sure about: I even think that it can be anybody's claim for the source and not just yours meaning that even if you promise to never enforce source disclosure somebody else could do so.

Please reconsider your license choice for the sake of security of devs against source claims.

[rastanthology]

This topic has not been posted in for a while, but I think the issue still remains.

As for LGPL: As far as I know, as soon as you pack AndEngine with your Game (which obviously you need to do in order to use it for marketplace apps), LGPL forces you to publish your code. I think this will keep almost every commercial app developer from using your engine.
One thing I am not 100% sure about: I even think that it can be anybody's claim for the source and not just yours meaning that even if you promise to never enforce source disclosure somebody else could do so.

Please reconsider your license choice for the sake of security of devs against source claims.

So if i develop with andengine I have to release the source of what i developed? are you positive about this? I mean what´s the point of doing a commercial release if anyone can get the code and compile it for its device?

[delirium83]

I am by no means an expert of open source licenses, however I refer specifically to this section on wikipedias LGPL article:

Essentially, if it is a "work that uses the library", then it must be possible for the software to be linked with a newer version of the LGPL-covered program. The most commonly used method for doing so is to use "a suitable shared library mechanism for linking". Alternatively, a statically linked library is allowed if either source code or linkable object files are provided.

If this paragraph truthfully reflects LGPL's usage terms and in case I understand this paragraph correctly, it means that we would have to publish our source code if we used AndEngine, as we otherwise only provide it via the MarketPlace where users cannot update the AndEngine version used by our apps.

Could anybody please confirm this? In this case I personally would refrain from using AndEngine until (if ever) a license switch occurs.

@Nicolas: do you intend to switch the license to something commercial-app friendly? Previously you stated that you don't care about the type of license... maybe it would be worth reconsidering LGPL.

[AlexNunn]

LGPL means the library, AndEngine, is open source and any changes you make to the library must be available when you release the program using the modified library. Your game's source code is not covered by the LGPL. Only the library is.

This is why it's a good idea to compile AndEngine as a separate project from your game.

A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.

[delirium83]

yes, that is also from that wikipedia article, however the paragraph I posted extends what you cited.

Your proposition sounds interesting, but how would you package AndEngine separately from the application for a MarketPlace release? As far as I understood this would be necessary to avoid the problems I posted before.