TLDR: It’s compatible with other copy-left licenses like GPLv3. However, it’s available in multiple languages, which technically makes it more applicable.

I started using it for my own project. If you want a practical example: https://github.com/TimoKats/emmer

  • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    I can only answer the first question:

    The great thing about the EUPL is: Its terms prevail if the other license does not have conflicting provisions. Any code licensed under EUPL will keep the SaaS restrictions:

    However, according to the EUPL, the compatible licence that is applied to a derivative work will prevail “in case of conflict” with the EUPL. For example, when the EUPL licensor has its seat in Germany, the applicable law is German and the court is Berlin, but if the code is reused in a French project distributed under CeCILL, the French law will be applicable and the competent court will be Paris. But on the strongest open source EUPL provisions, like the coverage of SaaS and the obligation to publish and share the derivative source code, none of the listed compatible licences enters in conflict with the EUPL: for example, they may not “impose” code distribution in case of SaaS distribution, but they do not prohibit it. Therefore the EUPL obligations are persistent.

    https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/eupl/matrix-eupl-compatible-open-source-licences