On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 11:53 AM Wim de With <wf@dewith.io> wrote:
Since the intent of libvirt using LGPL was explicitly to allow non-GPL compatible applications to use libvirt, it is a mistake to be using a license that breaks this ability for Rust.
In Golang we've used MIT license
For Rust we should aim for whatever is most appropriate - MIT or BSD or Apache - I'm not familiar with which is dominant in the Rust world.
Apache and MIT or even dual licensing of both are the most common. The official API guidelines recommend dual licensing under Apache and MIT.
I would prefer we didn't repeat that dumb advice in libvirt-rs. Just go with Apache-2.0 if we want a permissively licensed crate. I would suggest MPL-2.0 for libvirt-rs, though. That allows proprietary linking but maintains that each file that makes up the crate *must* remain FOSS, and is compatible with GNU licenses. It's static-link compatible copyleft, basically. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!