Rather than releasing under the MIT license, I'm wondering if the authors had considered duel licensing their code under a strong copyleft license, like the GPL, and selling closed-source licenses? I'm considering doing this in addition to paid support and feature requests as mentioned in the blog.
This is something I thought about for a while. But isn't using MIT contributing to the project popularity?
Also, my project is a desktop application, so I think people don't really care if it's MIT or GPL. Maybe it makes more sense if it's a library.
Comments
Rather than releasing under the MIT license, I'm wondering if the authors had considered duel licensing their code under a strong copyleft license, like the GPL, and selling closed-source licenses? I'm considering doing this in addition to paid support and feature requests as mentioned in the blog.
This is something I thought about for a while. But isn't using MIT contributing to the project popularity? Also, my project is a desktop application, so I think people don't really care if it's MIT or GPL. Maybe it makes more sense if it's a library.
Yes, definitely.