U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Community » Coffee corner » (Commercial) Upp consulting?!

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

(Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20657]

Mon, 30 March 2009 14:23

JoseB
Messages: 37
Registered: March 2009

Member

Hello all,
As far as i understood, Upp is free for use for both open-source, freeware or commercial applications, right?

If I have a little enterprise. I am new in upp but as it is a really good tool, could i some day give consulting in UPP in my country in a commercial point of view.

I mean, can i organize paid trainning sessions and have paid upp tutorials etc?

Please, explain me if i could made that or not.

Thank you

Jose

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20658 is a reply to message #20657]

Mon, 30 March 2009 15:16

mr_ped
Messages: 826
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha

Experienced Contributor

Basically:
new BSD license (also U++) - you can sell anything, even TheIDE itself, in whatever form (including binary, training, sources)...

GPL - you can sell training/support without limitation. You can sell your own work or the unmodified original work as long as you make sources accessible to customer and as long as the product is under GPL license too. But there's absolutely no restriction on monetary side of thing. (some people in forums have difficulty to understand this... just ignore them)

The problem is not whether you can. The problem is to find customer willing to pay for something what is available for free elsewhere. The training/support is best choice, because that's not available so directly, but if you are skilled merchant who can sell even firefox, you *can* (with sources and under GPL license).
Good luck turning this into profit (I'm not that good personally. Sad

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20659 is a reply to message #20658]

Mon, 30 March 2009 15:52

JoseB
Messages: 37
Registered: March 2009

Member

So, for trainning purposes and support material (tutorials etc) there is no problem.

Just one more question about UPP licences:

Upp is BSD
MinGW and gcc are GPL

Well, when we "generate" an executable from UPP source code using MinGW, what is the licence for the executable? BSD (From UPP) or GPL (from compilers)?

Thanks

Jose

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20661 is a reply to message #20659]

Mon, 30 March 2009 16:00

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

JoseB wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 09:52

Compiler itself should not affect the final license.

You might want to check the license of libraries. AFAIK, mingw libraries are public domain...

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20662 is a reply to message #20659]

Mon, 30 March 2009 16:16

sergeynikitin
Messages: 748
Registered: January 2008
Location: Moscow, Russia

Contributor

You may not deliver the GCC (MinGW).
Property of GCC - to produce a program in C++ language (not in GCC language). Without this feature, GCC - did not need. If you are not using their source GCC, which generate the code (not libraries to include C++ code), then you have no relationship to the license, which you use GCC.

SergeyNikitin<U++>( linux, wine )
{
under( Ubuntu || Debian || Raspbian );
}

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20663 is a reply to message #20662]

Mon, 30 March 2009 16:33

JoseB
Messages: 37
Registered: March 2009

Member

Sorry people,

Let me know if i understood:

For training, support, tutorials, etc, no problem at all (BSD, GPL, LGPL).

For creating applications the best option is to delivery the source code too to not have problems of any type, right? Smile

Jose

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20664 is a reply to message #20657]

Mon, 30 March 2009 17:27

mr_ped
Messages: 826
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha

Experienced Contributor

EDIT: I made huge mistake about linking of LGPL/GPL code, see following posts. (and I edited this one too).

Creating applications - depends what they consist of. Options are:

your C++ source - free

U++ libraries - new BSD (free)
- some inclusions in "Bazaar" or "plugin" directory may have they own license, but they are either compatible with BSD in this aspect, or they should be reported to U++ developers as breaking the license. But usually if you see "external" code added to U++, it's worth to look out for license.

clib, stl and other common C/C++ libraries - usually LGPL or free

other more special libraries like SDL, xyzSQL, DirectX, etc..
- you have to check license of each such library

Basically there are 3 most important licenses:

BSD - new is almost like "free", older ones sometimes require to give a credit of original authors

GPL - you can sell the result, but you must provide your source code under GPL too (sort of viral license)

LGPL - "lesser" GPL - very often used for libraries
- you can link dynamically(!) to the library and remain free
- if you modify the library source itself, you should provide it under GPL (sources), but only the library. (i.e. inside library it's GPL as above, outside of library you are free)

- so pure U++ application is free. With some additional libraries like SDL/etc. you should check all the licenses and decide by those, LGPL are almost like free, GPL will infect whole source.

[Updated on: Tue, 31 March 2009 00:16]

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20665 is a reply to message #20664]

Mon, 30 March 2009 20:04

JoseB
Messages: 37
Registered: March 2009

Member

Well, my app uses these ones:

plugin\z
plugin\sqlite3
plugin\png
plugin\jpg

I got this info looking for the IDE window that shows the packages.

It seems that there are no problems with them.

Ok, i got the rule:
1. Develop pure Upp application
2. If external libs are needed, so check their lic or send an email to the authors

thank you

Jose

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20666 is a reply to message #20664]

Mon, 30 March 2009 21:12

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

mr_ped wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 18:27

GPL - you can sell the result, but you must provide your source code under GPL too (sort of viral license)
(clumsy) workaround - you can maybe link it dynamically (loading *.dll for example during program run) and call functions of it from commercial application. But this is sort of gray zone, because you have to do the dynamically linked part well (you can't link statically), and also I'm afraid you can't distribute such *.dll together with non-GPL software, i.e. you must distribute your application and those GPL modules separately. You have to provide sources for GPL modules. And some GPL people claim this is still not legal, maybe the best way is to ask author of GPL code if he likes your usage of it.

I think you can't do that. Still derived software. Must provide all sources, for modules also. This is why LGPL was invented, so that dynamically linked items can be distributed source free.

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20667 is a reply to message #20666]

Mon, 30 March 2009 21:17

JoseB
Messages: 37
Registered: March 2009

Member

Confusion, is not it?

Like i said, we give the source code and no worries about lics. Smile

Jose

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20669 is a reply to message #20664]

Mon, 30 March 2009 22:55

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

mr_ped wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 11:27

LGPL - "lesser" GPL - very often used for libraries
- you can link statically to the library and remain free

AFAIK, wrong. You can only link DYNAMICALLY to the library and remain free.

(The obvious reason is that user of your application is then allowed to replace .so with altered code).

Note that some libraries, like wxWidgets, have amendments to LGPL that explicitly allows static linking too.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: (Commercial) Upp consulting?! [message #20671 is a reply to message #20657]

Tue, 31 March 2009 00:14

mr_ped
Messages: 826
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha

Experienced Contributor

Yes, sorry, my mistake.
GPL - no linking.
LGPL - dynamic linking.

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	M$
Next Topic:	Commercial soft or OpenSource (What kind of programs you create using Ultimate++?)?

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Apr 26 14:33:27 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02414 seconds