<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>DevKick Forums - GPL for CSS</title>
		<link>http://devkick.com/talk/topic/24/gpl-for-css/</link>
		<description>The most recent posts in GPL for CSS.</description>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:01:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Re: GPL for CSS</title>
			<link>http://devkick.com/talk/post/690/#p690</link>
			<description>I&#039;m wondering if there&#039;s a chance that a dual-license would be considered for Tripoli, with the addition of either LGPL as mentioned before, or a BSD style artistic license?  I love Tripoli (as I do all Open Source software) and would happily use Tripoli in personal web development projects, but the GPL license would essentially prevent me from pursuing its use in work-related projects. Although these are inherently internal web applications being developed for my work place, it would affect any potential future commercialisation efforts.
I don&#039;t see that I would modify the Tripoli source in any way (and as has been pointed out by the original poster all CSS is accessible / downloadable anyway) thus, in my mind, the question of whether a restrictive GPL license is appropriate for Triploi must be asked.  Regardless however, congratulations on an awesome product!</description>
			<author>dummy@example.com (SD)</author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://devkick.com/talk/post/690/#p690</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Re: GPL for CSS</title>
			<link>http://devkick.com/talk/post/398/#p398</link>
			<description>I too am curious -- why GPL? Because CSS is always visible to any user, it doesn&#039;t seem to gain you any advantages of a viral license. It seems like the LGPL would be more appropriate. I&#039;m specifically evaluating for Turbogears 2, but Tripoli would be the perfect default CSS for a lot of web frameworks but will be untouchable as GPL for these MIT, BSD or Apache-licensed frameworks.</description>
			<author>dummy@example.com (deanlandolt)</author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://devkick.com/talk/post/398/#p398</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GPL for CSS</title>
			<link>http://devkick.com/talk/post/64/#p64</link>
			<description>Hi, I was wondering about the choice of GPL for Tripoli. I would expect that any CSS that relies on it (via @import or implicitly) would have to be GPLed as well. While CSS is a source format and the files are available for download from any site that uses them, I may not want to license my CSS itself as GPLed. Wouldn&#039;t the LGPL be a better choice?

Nice work on Tripoli from what I can see.
Cheers!</description>
			<author>dummy@example.com (spacebat)</author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 01:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://devkick.com/talk/post/64/#p64</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
