In a message dated 11/14/99 2:52:24 AM, you wrote:
Since we are revisiting this conversation, I have two
questions:
1) Whatever happened to our tentative decision to use
the Public Domain license?
This seems to have everything we are committed to.
You can always have a "free" version available
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999 Alain Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alain: Besides, given the fact that our engin is not
ready yet and, consequently that we will be using
MetaCard's engin for the time being, we cannot allow
standalones because MetaCard's engin is not open
source.
Correction: there'd
Scott Raney wrote:
On Sun, 14 Nov 1999, Michael Fair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since we are revisiting this conversation, I have two
questions:
1) Whatever happened to our tentative decision to use
the Public Domain license?
This seems to have everything we are committed to.
You
well, yeah, but lets say I want to make ClarisOffice 2001, I wanna give VB
for Apps a run for it's money, so I integrate NuCard with ClarisOffice. It's
in the NuCard consortium to have this done (publicizes nuCard and allows
nuCard to work with ClarisOffic), and it couldn't be done with a PD
Alain: To be considered GPL we would merely have to
insist that derivatives of OpenKard will be open
source too, correct?
Anthony: Standalones would have to be GPL then, too.
Alain: I suppose that you (and Scott) are right that
standalones would be considered derivative works.
Anthony:
At 1:55 PM -0800 on 11/13/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
Anthony: In short, if we use the GPL as is, then all
standalones must be under the GPL. If we add a clause
exempting standalones, all I have to do to make it
closed-source is create a standalone. The GPL would
work, were it not for these
Since we are revisiting this conversation, I have two
questions:
1) Whatever happened to our tentative decision to use
the Public Domain license?
This seems to have everything we are committed to.
You can always have a "free" version available to you.
2) It was never really explained all that
Michael Fair: Using the GCC underlying architecture
will create licensing problems unless we reimplement
the whole shebang.
Alain: We must avoid licencing problems.
What are they in this case?
Anthony: The GPL 'virus'. That is, we'd have to use
the GPL.
Alain: To be considered GPL we
At 3:52 PM -0800 on 11/12/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
Michael Fair: Using the GCC underlying architecture
will create licensing problems unless we reimplement
the whole shebang.
Alain: We must avoid licencing problems.
What are they in this case?
Anthony: The GPL 'virus'. That is, we'd have
