Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org writes:
A secondary reasoning for some open source licenses might be to
prevent others from running off with the good stuff and selling it for
profit. The GPL is big on that […]
Really, it's not. Please stop spreading this canard.
The GPL explicitly and
I take ...running off with the good stuff and selling it for profit to
mean creating derivative work and commercializing it as proprietary code
which you can not do with GPL licensed code. Also, while the GPL does not
prevent selling copies for profit it does not make it very practical either.
Nir Aides n...@winpdb.org writes:
I take ...running off with the good stuff and selling it for profit to
mean creating derivative work and commercializing it as proprietary code
which you can not do with GPL licensed code.
It's the “proprietary“ which is the distinguishing criterion there.
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:10:09AM +0300, Nir Aides wrote:
I take ...running off with the good stuff and selling it for profit to mean
creating derivative work and commercializing it as proprietary code which
you
can not do with GPL licensed code. Also, while the GPL does not prevent
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
That's the point: selling, and commercial activity in general, is
explicitly encouraged and permission granted by the GPL. Too many people
speak as though it were otherwise. To those who do: Please stop.
Please, GPL
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:01 AM, Virgil Dupras hs...@hardcoded.net wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
That's the point: selling, and commercial activity in general, is
explicitly encouraged and permission granted by the GPL. Too many people
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:58:26 pm Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Antoine Pitrou writes:
Which is the very wrong thing to do, though. License text should
be understandable by non-lawyer people;
This is a common mistake, at least with respect to common-law
systems. Licenses are written in a
On 05.07.10 16:19, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 7/4/2010 2:31 AM, Éric Araujo wrote:
But Python tests lack coverage stats, so it is hard to say anything.
FYI: http://coverage.livinglogic.de/
Turns out the audioop is one of the
Jesse Noller jnol...@gmail.com writes:
The Python / PSF license won't be changing anytime soon.
The existing license for Python suits me fine.
Ben could have just have easily responded to Guido in private if he
felt that strongly.
No. I responded in the same forum where the falsehood was
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Walter Dörwald wal...@livinglogic.de wrote:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/ *does* include coverage info for stuff
written in C, see for example:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/Objects/unicodeobject.c.html
However it *is* strange that test_audioop.py gets
Steven D'Aprano writes:
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:58:26 pm Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Licenses are written in a formal language intended to have
precise semantics, especially in the event of a dispute going to
court. What you wrote is precisely analogous to a computer program
should be
On Jul 04, 2010, at 06:58 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
I’d like to volunteer to maintain a tool but I’m not sure where I can
help. I’m already proposing changes to Brett for
Tools/scripts/patchcheck.py, and I have commented on Tools/i18n bugs,
but these ones are already maintained by their authors
On Jul 04, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2010/7/4 Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org:
On behalf of the Python development team, I'm jocund to announce the
second release candidate of Python 2.7.
Arg!!! This should, of course, be final release.
Congratulations Benjamin!
-Barry
On 06.07.10 15:07, Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Walter Dörwald wal...@livinglogic.de wrote:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/ *does* include coverage info for stuff
written in C, see for example:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/Objects/unicodeobject.c.html
However
On 27 Jun, 2010, at 11:48, Greg Ewing wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.06.2010 09:58:
Would there be any sanity in having an option to compile
Python with UTF-8 as the internal string representation?
It would break Py_UNICODE, because the internal size of a unicode character
Yes. The BSD license on FreeBSD has allowed Apple to
make MacOS X a completely proprietary product. The BSD
license allows you to take and never release your mods. It
has very little to do with money, IMO.
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Nir Aides
On 7/5/2010 11:47 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
The point of free software licenses, though (as opposed to proprietary
licenses), is not mainly to go to court (to “protect IP”, as the PSF
says - quite naively in my opinion); it is to enable trust among people.
Yes, that is true. Open source
On 7/5/2010 8:03 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
Neil Hodgson wrote:
There have been moves in the past to simplify the license of Python
but this would require agreement from the current rights owners
including CWI and CNRI. IIRC not all of the rights owners are willing
to agree to a change.
That
LD 'Gus' Landis writes:
Yes. The BSD license on FreeBSD has allowed Apple to
make MacOS X a completely proprietary product.
That's simply not true.
http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1064/.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
I stand corrected. Thanks for the pointer Stephen!
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
LD 'Gus' Landis writes:
Yes. The BSD license on FreeBSD has allowed Apple to
make MacOS X a completely proprietary product.
That's simply not true.
On Jul 6, 2010, at 8:09 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
You've never used Apple's much-missed Hypertalk, have you? :)
on mailingListMessage
get the message
put it into aMessage
if the thread of aMessage contains license wankery
put aMessage into the trash
This idea has been discussed extensively in this and other forums and
I believe it is time to make a decision.
The proposal is to add pure python implementation of datetime module
to stdlib. The current C implementation will transparently override
pure python definitions in CPython. Other
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:59, Alexander Belopolsky
alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
This idea has been discussed extensively in this and other forums and
I believe it is time to make a decision.
The proposal is to add pure python implementation of datetime module
to stdlib. The current
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Walter Dörwald wal...@livinglogic.de wrote:
On 05.07.10 16:19, Nick Coghlan wrote:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/ *does* include coverage info for stuff
written in C, see for example:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/Objects/unicodeobject.c.html
Ah, I missed
I think there are a couple of potential action items that have come out
of the discussion.
1. Python License
If there is not already, could there be an explanatory note, something
like (worded to be 'neutral':
The Python License is complicated because Python has been developed at
various
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Alexander Belopolsky
alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
What do you think? Please reply here or add a comment at
http://bugs.python.org/issue7989.
(For those that haven't read the tracker discussion, it's long, but
worth skimming to get a better idea of the
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Asking contributors to give written licenses in addition to the license
implicit in the act of contribution is an act of distrust. It says something
like We worry that you might change you mind and sue, and a court might not
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
1. Python License
If there is not already, could there be an explanatory note, something like
(worded to be 'neutral':
As a sub-point, I'd like to see something short explaining how the
different licenses in the LICENSE file
Terry Reedy wrote:
Comment on trust. Trust works both ways. So does distrust.
Asking contributors to give written licenses in addition to the license
implicit in the act of contribution is an act of distrust. It says
something like We worry that you might change you mind and sue, and a
[Also posted to http://bugs.python.org/issue2986
Developed with input from Eli Bendersky, who will write patchfile(s) for
whichever change option is chosen.]
Summary: difflib.SeqeunceMatcher was developed, documented, and
originally operated as a flexible class for comparing pairs of
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
After the switch, hg.python.org/cpython will be the official repo, and
code.python.org/hg will probably be closed.
Why this transition is not described in PEP?
Because it's not a transition. It's a mirror. It was
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 7:47 PM, anatoly techtonik techto...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
After the switch, hg.python.org/cpython will be the official repo, and
code.python.org/hg will probably be closed.
Why this transition is
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
[Also posted to http://bugs.python.org/issue2986
A much faster way to find the first mismatch would be
i = 0
while first[i] == second[i]:
i+=1
The match ratio, based on the initial matching prefix only, is
On 7/6/2010 3:59 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
I am more interested in Brett's overall vision than this particular
module. I understand that to be one of a stdlib that is separate from
CPython and is indeed the standard Python library.
Questions:
!. Would the other distributions use a
[Terry Reedy]
[Also posted to http://bugs.python.org/issue2986
Developed with input from Eli Bendersky, who will write patchfile(s) for
whichever change option is chosen.]
Thanks for paying attention to this, Terry (and Ed)! I somehow
managed to miss the whole discussion over the intervening
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, if you look at some of the code that even Guido has
submitted (e.g. pgen2), that's actually come in under Google's
contributor agreement, rather than Guido's personal one. Presumably
that was work he did on
36 matches
Mail list logo
