Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 22:17 -0700, Weldon Washburn wrote: > >>Also, the following mail archive says that Apache has issues with CPL code: >> >>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200503.mbox/[EMAIL >>PROTECTED] >> >>Does MMTK exist under any other license? > > > That seems to be similar to how we (FSF/GNU) look at the CPL. It is a > free software license. But since it is incompatible with the GPL (has > different requirements on distribution) we are happy to use it for > standalone use in applications, but we won't use such code bases for > creating larger derivative works.
Yeah. Ideally bits and pieces, as they are contributed to Harmony would be licensed under the Apache license or even more liberal licenses, and the work on fixing the license incompatibility between Apache license (2) and GPL (2) would result in the legal harmonization allowing the reuse of bits and chunks of Harmony in GPLd projects as well. cheers, dalibor topic
