Syntax highlighting component for closed source

[cybermonkey342]

I am aware that there is the TSynEdit component but AFAIK the license says that a program using it must be open source. So is there any other syntax highlighting component for Lazarus which allows commercial, closed source applications?

[marcov]

Afaik synedit is MPL, and thus only changes to synedit itself need to be donated back, not the whole application.

IOW, it is generally considered to be fine to use in a commercial, closed source application

[Morton]

Afaik synedit is MPL, and thus only changes to synedit itself need to be donated back, not the whole application.

IOW, it is generally considered to be fine to use in a commercial, closed source application

Actually the core is public domain,
as I promised if the editor is significantly enhanced by the community.
Everybody who has contributed to it has agreed to the release into the public domain.
One could therefore even argue that the whole thing is public domain if the
contributors did not expressly withdraw from this agreement.

Licencing the whole thing under the MPL was illegal.

[BigChimp]

First off, let me see I really appreciate people releasing code into the public domain but...

even argue that the whole thing is public domain if the contributors did not expressly withdraw from this agreement.

Licencing the whole thing under the MPL was illegal.

Could you tell me exactly how putting something in the public domain prohibits anybody from relicensing code as they see fit? AFAIU, you relinquish your right to determine how something is distributed/licensed once you put something in the public domain...

[Morton]

Could you tell me exactly how putting something in the public domain prohibits anybody from relicensing code as they see fit?

Everybody can licence own work as wished.
Nobody can put any licence on public domain.

[BigChimp]

Let's agree to disagree.

[Morton]

Let's agree to disagree.

Just curious.
At which point do you  disagree.

They could have licenced their additional work as wished, but not the whole thing.

[marcov]

First off, let me see I really appreciate people releasing code into the public domain but...

Could you tell me exactly how putting something in the public domain prohibits anybody from relicensing code as they see fit? AFAIU, you relinquish your right to determine how something is distributed/licensed once you put something in the public domain...

There is no relicensing. If there is code in there from an author that hasn't agreed to the MPL, it should say so, with "portions added by X under MPL" or something like that added.

At least under most continental laws copyright is inalienable. It might be different under common law systems.

[BigChimp]

Just curious.
At which point do you  disagree.

This is the part I disagree with:

Nobody can put any licence on public domain.

(edit) and also/especially:

Licencing the whole thing under the MPL was illegal.

If something is PD it has no license or restrictions at all attached to it. Therefore, anybody can copy, license etc as they see fit. Therefore I don't see how it can be illegal to relicense.

However, once something is PD, it remains so, so if anybody else wants to copy the exact same thing, no problem. As long as he/she only takes the PD parts.
Perhaps in practice/in the end we more or less agree

@Marco: common law systems indeed differ wrt copyright etc. AFAIU you can relinquish all copyright by placing things into PD.
IIUC, even under civil law systems, you can relinquish a lot of your rights, including rights to reproduce, but you cannot relinquish certain moral rights (once again, IIRC) e.g. the right to be called the author.

I presume www.iusmentis.com has some articles on this... yep, see e.g. http://www.iusmentis.com/computerprograms/licenses/choosing/