> From recent experience: In order to enable people to freely
> use Marathon
> together with GPL and non-GPL projects, don't GPL it, but
> LGPL it. Read
> gnu.org for the details, if you go GPL, then Marathon could
> only be used
> with GPL software.
>
> LGPL is compatible with GPL, but it can also be used with Mozilla,
> OpenOffice, Apache and all those non-GPL licenses.
>
> D.

I am excited about marathon being open-sourced. Just to open up the
discussion a bit, does the rules and strictures of the GPL or LGPL go
contrary to Delphi created software that uses the VCL? For all intents and
purposes you would have to publish them too would you not, and thats not
legal. Or am I just plain wrong?

Anyways, I am in favour of the multi - liscensing concept, which adds
versatility to the way the s/w can be distributed, and also makes it more
acceptabe to multiple (sometimes opposed) camps. I would think that
multi-liscensing a product with a GPL (if applicable) and a MPL or such
would ensure the best product growth.

Just my 2c.

Sean