On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 22:47 +0900, bkml wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2007, at 9:54 PM, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
> 
> > I thought that all OpenPBX/CallWeaver code was supposed to be licensed
> > under the GPL?
> 
> According to the FSF, MIT license terms are GPL compatible and assume  
> GPL terms when linked with a GPLed application.

That may be true, I realize that all sorts of licenses are compatible
with the GPL.  I don't have any problems with MIT licenses.

The problem here is that we shouldn't be mixing licences in the CW
source code because:

1) It's just confusing, especially if you are trying to combine CW with
some other software that has some other license - now you have twice the
work to do trying to figure out if you're still legal.

2) It sets a bad prececent - if we allow non-GPL code one time someone
will come along and ask to include code with some other license.

3) While I don't believe that the decision was ever made explicitly, I
had thought that all CW code was supposed to be available solely under
the GPL - isn't that part of the reason we're here in the first place?

Jeff

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Callweaver-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.callweaver.org/mailman/listinfo/callweaver-dev

Reply via email to