MIT might be a better license for broad adoption. Both GPL and LGPL are viral licenses. They serve a purpose, but you need to assess if that purpose is the same as yours.
Would you object to MIT now and GPL/dual later when mature ? Though I suppose the license doesn't count when people are just trying the lib (which they seemingly don't..)
If it were dual-licensed, I think it’d be hard to find anyone who’d object. GPL is scary to me, though, since I prefer to license my stuff under pretty unrestrictive licenses, and I don’t really want to deal with the virality.
exactly my thoughts, generally GPL any version or (L)GPLv3 or greater means your library will never be included in a commercial product, hence crippling the mass adaption
alcover|3 years ago
OmarAssadi|3 years ago
iExploder|3 years ago