What is the ScadaBR license? Is GPL, MIT, etc.?
Regards!
Dear spirit,
ScadaBR is heavily based on Mango (up to 2011 versions), which is reportedly GPL. For that reason, we have included in our helpfiles and documentation a "GPL" license text, as far as I am aware.
But I agree that a detailed revision is needed, and in fact some parts might end being replaced or maybe rewritten, should any problems arise. Some pieces of ScadaBR were submitted by individual contributors who weren´t too zealous about licensing, but those should, certainly, be reviewed too.
The original mango (m2m) has stopped being published as public open source software, but we are now assessing that its older codebase keeps compatible for us, so that we can go on as free software. We saw no problem with Open Scada (we got OPC from them) which has not changed its licensing in noticeable ways. We integrated tomcat´s installer which uses very liberal apache licensing. I do not recall every contribution sources right now, but as a general guideline, everything is open-source.
Since "i´m not a lawyer" and any large project is subject to possible litigious notifications, we are now working hard to detail all mixed licences we used, and to compatibilize everything under one simpler, clear licence agreement, just to keep in the safe side. We are doing this 1) as a choice of our professional style & roadmap; 2) for common good; and 3) because we love open-source. We want to remain free, and we are open to comments in that sense. Although we lack more clear documentation right now, the team has always worked in "good faith" of using only OSI-approved material.
MCA (where I work) and 3 other institutions co-own copyright for the API, a few protocols, parts of installer (actually based on Tomcat NSIS script), portuguese translation, Flash HMI builder, and minor enhancements. We have legal agreement to issue all source-codes in "GPL-compatible licences, preferrably MIT or LGPL", and we are taking action to make evertything more clear.
We will perform a heavy effort to ensure that everything is free software, in a broader sense (free to use, study, modify, distribute).
I am personaly pro-LGPL and pro-MIT, as those are very pragmatic, but I understand that probably everything should fall under the same GPL umbrella, or at least, keep original licensing where explicitly expressed by original authors.
Licensing experts would be welcome in helping us with such revision, providing further advice if needed. Everything we have is under the sourceforge SVN, open for download.
keep in touch,
best regards.
Victor