[BioSQL-l] license

[Peter]

> > Have you read the very short and very liberal Biopython license?  I
> > assume that what ever you pick would be compatible... although
> > probably much more restrictive:
> >
> > http://www.biopython.org/DIST/LICENSE
>
> Is this effectively the MIT license?

Yes

> > On a related note, are the bits of Biopython that deal with BioSQL
> > considered part of the Biopython Project, the BioSQL project, or both?
>
> Funny you ask, I just pondered that question myself the other day. I
> guess de-facto the language bindings have been part of the toolkits,
> not part of BioSQL. I don't see a good reason to change that, and in
> fact from the viewpoint of maintenance they probably better remain
> part of the respective toolkits.

OK, good.  I'll get round to updating the headers in Biopython's
BioSQL bindings.

As to the licence for BioSQL (your later email), I personally would be
happy with either of LGPL v3.0 or MIT.  I suspect using the MIT
licence would be a little more popular with industry (if they want to
make any changes to the schema, which is probably fairly common).

Peter