Licence/es: Difference between revisions

From FreeCAD Documentation
(Fixed debian copyright link, added French translation)
(Updating to match new version of source page)
Line 1: Line 1:
=== Declaración del conservador/mantenedor ===
=== Statement of the maintainer ===
I know that the discussion on the ''"right"'' licence for open source occupied a significant portion of internet bandwidth and so is here the reason why, in my opinion, FreeCAD should have this one.


I chose the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGPL LGPL] for the project and I know the pro and cons about the LGPL and will give you some reasons for that decision.


FreeCAD is a mixture of a library and an application, so the GPL would be a little bit strong for that. It would prevent writing commercial modules for FreeCAD because it would prevent linking with the FreeCAD base libs. You may ask why commercial modules at all? Therefore Linux is good example. Would Linux be so successful when the GNU C Library would be GPL and therefore prevent linking against non-GPL applications? And although I love the freedom of Linux, I also want to be able to use the very good NVIDIA 3D graphic driver. I understand and accept the reason NVIDIA does not wish to give away driver code. We all work for companies and need payment or at least food. So for me, a coexistence of open source and closed source software is not a bad thing, when it obeys the rules of the LGPL. I would like to see someone writing a Catia import/export processor for FreeCAD and distribute it for free or for some money. I don't like to force him to give away more than he wants to. That wouldn't be good neither for him nor for FreeCAD.
Sé que el debate sobre la licencia ''"adecuada"'' para el código abierto ocupa una parte importante del ancho de banda de Internet y esa es la razón por la que, en mi opinión, también FreeCAD debería tener aquí algo sobre el tema.


Nevertheless this decision is made only for the core system of FreeCAD. Every writer of an application module may make his own decision.
Elegí el [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGPL LGPL] y [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL GPL] para el proyecto y conozco los pros y los contras sobre LGPL, de modo que te explicaré algunos motivos para haber tomado esta elección.


=== Used Licences ===
FreeCAD es un híbrido entre una biblioteca y una aplicación, de modo que la licencia GPL sería demasiado fuerte para eso. No permitiría escribir módulos comerciales para FreeCAD porque impediría la vinculación con las librerías base de FreeCAD. Te puedes preguntar ¿por qué no prescindir totalmente de los módulos comerciales? En este ámbito Linux es un buen ejemplo. ¿Tendría Linux tanto éxito si la biblioteca GNU de C fuese GPL y, por tanto, incapacitada para ligarse con las aplicaciones no-GPL? Y aunque me encanta la libertad de Linux, yo también quiero ser capaz de usar el magnífico controlador gráfico NVIDIA 3D. Entiendo y acepto que NVIDIA tenga razones para no querer regalar el código de su controlador. Todos trabajamos para empresas y necesitamos el sueldo, o por lo menos comer. Por todo lo anterior, para mí, una coexistencia de software de código abierto y de código cerrado no es algo malo, cuando obedece a las reglas de la LGPL. Me gustaría ver a alguien escribiendo un módulo de importación/exportación de formato Catia para FreeCAD, y que se distribuyese, ya fuera gratis o por dinero. No me gusta obligar a nadie a que ceda más de lo que quiere. Eso no sería bueno ni para él, ni para FreeCAD.
Here the two licences under which FreeCAD is published:


;[[wikipedia:LGPL|Lesser General Public Licence (LGPL2+)]]: For the core libs as stated in the .h and .cpp files in src/App src/Gui src/Base and most [[Workbenches|modules]] in src/Mod and for the executable as stated in the .h and .cpp files in src/main. The icons and other graphic parts are also LGPL.
No obstante, esta decisión se ha tomado sólo para el sistema básico de FreeCAD. Todo escritor de un módulo de aplicación puede tomar su propia decisión.
;[[wikipedia:Open Publication License|Open Publication Licence]]: For the documentation on http://free-cad.sourceforge.net/ as not marked differently by the author




See FreeCAD's [http://free-cad.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=free-cad/free-cad;a=blob;f=package/debian/copyright;h=a97cf019d020edba596f2d0f614c9b09ce546b0f;hb=HEAD debian copyright file] for more details about the licenses used in FreeCAD
=== Licencias utilizadas ===


=== License side effects ===
He aquí las tres licencias bajo las que se publica FreeCAD:
Up to Version 0.13 FreeCAD is delivered as GPL2+, although the source itself is under LGPL2+. Thats because of linkage of Coin3D (GPL2) and PyQt(GPL). Starting with 0.14 we will be completely GPL free. PyQt will be replaced by PySide, and Coin3D was re-licensed under BSD. One problem, we still have to face, license-wise, the [http://www.opencascade.org/getocc/license/ OCTPL (Open CASCADE Technology Public License)]. Its a License mostly LGPL similar, with certain changes. On of the originators, Roman Lygin, elaborated on the License on his [http://opencascade.blogspot.de/2008/12/license-to-kill-license-to-use.html Blog]. The home-brew OCTPL license leads to all kind of side effects for FreeCAD, which where widely discussed on different forums and mailing lists, e.g. on [http://www.opencascade.org/org/forum/thread_15859/?forum=3 OpenCasCade forum itself]. I will link here some articles for the biggest problems.


;[[wikipedia:LGPL|Lesser General Public Licence (LGPL2+)]]: Para las bibliotecas principales como se indica en los fichero .h y .cpp en src/App, src/Gui, sic/Base, y muchos de los [[Workbenches/es|módulos]] en src/Mod y para el ejecutable como se indica en los archivos .h y .cpp en el directorio src/main. Los iconos y otro material gráfico también son LGPL.
==== GPL2/GPL3/OCTLP incompatibility ====
;[[wikipedia:GPL|General Public Licence (GPL2+)]]: Para los archivo de guión de Python que construyen los binarios como se indica en los archivos .py en src/Tools
We first discovered the problem by a discussion on the [http://www.fsf.org/ FSF] high priority project [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/polignu/XRergtwsm80 discussion list]. It was about a library we look at, which was licensed with GPL3. Since we linked back then with Coin3D, with GPL2 only, we was not able to adopt that lib. Also the
;[[wikipedia:Open Publication License|Open Publication Licence]]: Para la documentacion en http://free-cad.sourceforge.net/ salvo que se indique lo contrario por su autor
OCTPL is considered [http://www.opencascade.org/occt/faq/ GPL incompatible]. This Libre Graphics World article [http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/libredwg-drama-the-end-or-the-new-beginning "LibreDWG drama: the end or the new beginning?"] shows up the drama of LibreDWG project not acceptably in FreeCAD or LibreCAD.


==== Debian ====
Tratamos de utilizar sólo licencias de tipo LGPL para las bibliotecas vinculadas al núcleo (mira [[Third Party Libraries/es|Bibliotecas de terceros]]), con una excepción:
The incompatibility of the OCTPL [http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2009/10/msg00000.html was discussed on the debian legal list] and lead to a [http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=617613 bug report on the FreeCAD package] which prevent (ignor-tag) the transition from debian-testing to the main distribution. But its also mentioned thats a FreeCAD, which is free of GPL code and libs, would be acceptably. With a re-licensed Coin3D V4 and a substituted PyQt we will hopefully reach GPL free with the 0.14 release.
* La licencia de Coin3D ([http://www.coin3d.org/licensing/ www.coin3d.org]).


==== Fedora/RedHat non-free ====
Mira el archivo [http://free-cad.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=free-cad/free-cad;a=blob;f=package/debian/copyright;h=a97cf019d020edba596f2d0f614c9b09ce546b0f;hb=HEAD debian copyright file] de FreeCAD, para tener más detalles sobre las licencias utilizadas en FreeCAD
In the Fedora project OpenCasCade is listed "non-free". This means basically it won't make it into Fedora or RedHat. This means also FreeCAD won't make it into Fedora/RedHat until OCC is changing its license. Here the links to the license evaluation:
* [http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/001713.html Discussion on the Fedora-legal-list]
* [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458974#c10 License review entry in the RedHat bug tracker]
The main problem they have AFIK is that the OCC license demand non discriminatory support fees if you want to do paid support. It has nothing to do with "free" or OpenSource, its all about RedHat's business model!


=== Alcance de las licencias ===
=== Impact of the licences ===


==== Usuarios particulares ====
==== Private users ====
Private users can use FreeCAD free of charge and can do basically whatever they want to do with it....
Los usuarios particulares pueden utilizar FreeCAD de manera gratuita y pueden hacer básicamente cualquier cosa que quieran hacer con él ....


==== Usuarios profesionales ====
==== Professional users ====
Pueden usar libremente FreeCAD para cualquier tipo de trabajo particular o profesional. Se puede personalizar la aplicación como lo deseen. Pueden escribir extensiones para FreeCAD en código abierto o cerrado. Son siempre dueños de sus datos, no están obligados a actualizar FreeCAD, ni cambiar el uso que hacen de FreeCAD. El uso de FreeCAD no les vincula a ningún tipo de contrato u obligación.
Can use FreeCAD freely, for any kind of private or professional work. They can customize the application as they wish. They can write open or closed source extensions to FreeCAD. They are always master of their data, they are not forced to update FreeCAD, change their usage of FreeCAD. Using FreeCAD doesn't bind them to any kind of contract or obligation.


==== Desarrolladores de código abierto (Open Source) ====
==== Open Source developers ====
Puede utilizar FreeCAD como base para sus propios módulos de extensión para usos especiales. Pueden elegir entre GPL o LGPL para permitir, o no, el uso de su trabajo en software propietario.
Can use FreeCAD as the groundwork for own extension modules for special purposes. They can choose either the GPL or the LGPL to allow the use of their work in proprietary software or not.


==== Desarrolladores profesionales ====
==== Commercial developers ====
Commercial developers can use FreeCAD as the groundwork for their own extension modules for special purposes and are not forced to make their modules open source. They can use all modules which use the LGPL. They are allowed to distribute FreeCAD along with their proprietary software. They will get the support of the author(s) as long as it is not a one way street.
Los desarrolladores profesionales pueden utilizar FreeCAD como base para sus propios módulos de extensión para propósitos especiales y no están obligados a hacer sus módulos en código abierto. Pueden utilizar todos los módulos que utilizan LGPL. Se les permite distribuir FreeCAD junto con su software propietario. Se dará todo el apoyo del autor(es) siempre y cuando exista una actitud de correspondencia recíproca. Si quieres vender tu módulo necesitas una licencia de Coin3d, de lo contrario estás obligado por esta biblioteca a que tu módulo sea de código abierto.


{{docnav/es|Dialog creation/es|Tracker/es}}
{{docnav|Dialog creation|Tracker}}


[[Category:Developer Documentation]]
{{languages/es | {{en|Licence}} {{de|Licence/de}} {{fr|Licence/fr}} {{jp|Licence/jp}} {{ru|Licence/ru}} {{se|Licence/se}} }}


{{clear}}
[[Category:Developer Documentation/es]]
<languages/>

Revision as of 21:46, 5 November 2014

Statement of the maintainer

I know that the discussion on the "right" licence for open source occupied a significant portion of internet bandwidth and so is here the reason why, in my opinion, FreeCAD should have this one.

I chose the LGPL for the project and I know the pro and cons about the LGPL and will give you some reasons for that decision.

FreeCAD is a mixture of a library and an application, so the GPL would be a little bit strong for that. It would prevent writing commercial modules for FreeCAD because it would prevent linking with the FreeCAD base libs. You may ask why commercial modules at all? Therefore Linux is good example. Would Linux be so successful when the GNU C Library would be GPL and therefore prevent linking against non-GPL applications? And although I love the freedom of Linux, I also want to be able to use the very good NVIDIA 3D graphic driver. I understand and accept the reason NVIDIA does not wish to give away driver code. We all work for companies and need payment or at least food. So for me, a coexistence of open source and closed source software is not a bad thing, when it obeys the rules of the LGPL. I would like to see someone writing a Catia import/export processor for FreeCAD and distribute it for free or for some money. I don't like to force him to give away more than he wants to. That wouldn't be good neither for him nor for FreeCAD.

Nevertheless this decision is made only for the core system of FreeCAD. Every writer of an application module may make his own decision.

Used Licences

Here the two licences under which FreeCAD is published:

Lesser General Public Licence (LGPL2+)
For the core libs as stated in the .h and .cpp files in src/App src/Gui src/Base and most modules in src/Mod and for the executable as stated in the .h and .cpp files in src/main. The icons and other graphic parts are also LGPL.
Open Publication Licence
For the documentation on http://free-cad.sourceforge.net/ as not marked differently by the author


See FreeCAD's debian copyright file for more details about the licenses used in FreeCAD

License side effects

Up to Version 0.13 FreeCAD is delivered as GPL2+, although the source itself is under LGPL2+. Thats because of linkage of Coin3D (GPL2) and PyQt(GPL). Starting with 0.14 we will be completely GPL free. PyQt will be replaced by PySide, and Coin3D was re-licensed under BSD. One problem, we still have to face, license-wise, the OCTPL (Open CASCADE Technology Public License). Its a License mostly LGPL similar, with certain changes. On of the originators, Roman Lygin, elaborated on the License on his Blog. The home-brew OCTPL license leads to all kind of side effects for FreeCAD, which where widely discussed on different forums and mailing lists, e.g. on OpenCasCade forum itself. I will link here some articles for the biggest problems.


GPL2/GPL3/OCTLP incompatibility

We first discovered the problem by a discussion on the FSF high priority project discussion list. It was about a library we look at, which was licensed with GPL3. Since we linked back then with Coin3D, with GPL2 only, we was not able to adopt that lib. Also the OCTPL is considered GPL incompatible. This Libre Graphics World article "LibreDWG drama: the end or the new beginning?" shows up the drama of LibreDWG project not acceptably in FreeCAD or LibreCAD.

Debian

The incompatibility of the OCTPL was discussed on the debian legal list and lead to a bug report on the FreeCAD package which prevent (ignor-tag) the transition from debian-testing to the main distribution. But its also mentioned thats a FreeCAD, which is free of GPL code and libs, would be acceptably. With a re-licensed Coin3D V4 and a substituted PyQt we will hopefully reach GPL free with the 0.14 release.

Fedora/RedHat non-free

In the Fedora project OpenCasCade is listed "non-free". This means basically it won't make it into Fedora or RedHat. This means also FreeCAD won't make it into Fedora/RedHat until OCC is changing its license. Here the links to the license evaluation:

The main problem they have AFIK is that the OCC license demand non discriminatory support fees if you want to do paid support. It has nothing to do with "free" or OpenSource, its all about RedHat's business model!

Impact of the licences

Private users

Private users can use FreeCAD free of charge and can do basically whatever they want to do with it....

Professional users

Can use FreeCAD freely, for any kind of private or professional work. They can customize the application as they wish. They can write open or closed source extensions to FreeCAD. They are always master of their data, they are not forced to update FreeCAD, change their usage of FreeCAD. Using FreeCAD doesn't bind them to any kind of contract or obligation.

Open Source developers

Can use FreeCAD as the groundwork for own extension modules for special purposes. They can choose either the GPL or the LGPL to allow the use of their work in proprietary software or not.

Commercial developers

Commercial developers can use FreeCAD as the groundwork for their own extension modules for special purposes and are not forced to make their modules open source. They can use all modules which use the LGPL. They are allowed to distribute FreeCAD along with their proprietary software. They will get the support of the author(s) as long as it is not a one way street.

Dialog creation
Tracker