Publish tool for Java JMS load test

[Sheravat]

I find this forum very well and wonder why I ask the simple times here in the round. it looks like, have also been several members here tools for the "general" made to disposal. I'm going to write a java jms load test / stress test tool. I will then provide this free of charge to disposal. I would like to wait for feedback after the first and event. To provide as open source to disposal. The first version is simply the "jar" version with its batch / shell file start. What is the best license for such a tool. I'm honestly a bit lost in the entire license-jungle-jumble. it should at least ensure the following:

• 1st the program may not be sold
• 2nd the program may charge for commercial / non-commercial use - virtually every
• 3rd I will accept no responsibility for damage
• 4th the program may be distributed as long as all components remain

Please provide more information on the topic.

[Alejandro]

With your question is of course important, whether you make any 3rd party libraries (commons-lang or something) using. these are usually already under a specific license, on whose rules you have to keep yourself.

[Sheravat]

Thanks for your answer. yes, I've already considered. At the moment I do not use. All "plain" java based interface. Who used the tool has its "bring your own" and libs in the classpath reference when the tool starts. So at the moment is the tool free of 3rd party libs. Any other ideas when it comes to this now?

[PARRISH]

So very basically, the various licenses, different conditions. Basically refers such an open-source license on the copyright in the source code and not directly to the compilations, because the idea of open source is so precisely that I write a program that's source code to the public under certain conditions in places available and each the tool can compile it yourself.

[Timothi]

A GPL puts it states for example that others can use my code and modify as long as they make the changes under the GPL. A BSD license in turn prohibits the alteration of the code. A very liberal license is the Apache 2 license, which allows almost anything, so you need to change not even publish one only has to point out that a part of the program under an Apache license is. This leads again to the fact that libraries, which are not under an Apache license in a GPL program may be used and vice versa. On the other side of the Apache Software License may as desired be fitted into proprietary programs and therefore deemed to be particularly friendly business.

[StudyBoy]

Because your point four, I would most likely advise a BSD license, but tell me something disturbing the points one and two. Mir is not open source license known that distinguishes between commercial and noncommercial use of the software. There is even the sense of open source, that the two types of possible use. However, the GPL is because of their restrictive rules in the business sector as rather difficult. Many commercial software vendors therefore offer a dual license model, under which the software is under the GPL and its own commercial license. This software is basically a part of the open source community open, while firms shy away from that they must disclose their own software if they use open source version.

[Kaufman]

The GPL explicitly permits but that the code must be changed, which is not fit to point four. In addition, you may only tool for your own libraries have used that is also under GPL or LGPL. All in all, you should either rethink your requirements or come in front of your own license to develop, but this probably is not likely to increase the acceptance necessarily.

[Deabelos]

So someone has to use the tool it will build into its own software and also have a library for developing an implementation for the tool to build. So the person must understand the program compulsorily. So you should you ask the question who the target audience. The GPL is in the Java area of disseminated not so strong, so that probably the interest in a library that must be delivered with, but not because of the license can be rather low. In the Java area, above all, the Apache license is widespread, as Java brings a certain business focus. This should increase the acceptance of your software license agreement, but at the same time it would allow almost unlimited commercial use.

[Sheravat]

I just simply want to offer a tool where I can no collar to if something happens to their systems. The users (corporate, private, etc.), it can not to resell. I think I do not demand much. Anyone can use it (to test commercial products also spread), and (as long as it in "original" packaging is). To use the tool with 3rd party libs, eg SonicMQ, Weblogic MQ, OpenJMS, ActiveMQ ...... must have the Exploit each product and the jars in the classpath reference. But the tool itself is purely based on j2ee interfaces (especially javax.jms .*). Everything "provider specific" is configured via JNDI.

[Aashirya]

What an Open Source license so completely falls out from the election. This is your tool rather Freeware, here is a rather proprietary license come into play in setting the free use and describe the limitations (binary distribution, non-commercial projects, etc.). The license also includes the usual disclaimer v.wg.Damage and liability, etc., but must be adapted to suit your purposes.