On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:53:59 -0500 (EST) Robert Tomsick <rob...@tomsick.net> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Isaac Dunham wrote: > > > FYI: 3-clause BSD is MIT + "Binary distributions must include this > > copyright notice in accompanying documentation" (clause 2). 2-clause BSD > > drops the restriction on implying the endorsement of the copyright > > holder (clause 3), rather than the restriction on documentation > [...] > > X.org does include some BSD-licensed code, and it would seem > > _to_me_ that that would be reasonable with one limitation: If > > you are going to add any BSD-licensed code, you *must* also > > add the copyright information to a *single* file such as > > cde/copyright. > > Ok, so to confirm: 2-clause BSD would be OK if the copyright > for the file in question is listed in cde/copyright? Jon, what do you think? > The code I'm thinking of submitting is a stand-alone thing that > depends only on Motif, so it wouldn't involve any intermingling > with CDE code (it could be integrated later, of course, but as > it currently stands it's just a small > standalone Motif runner that I've been using with CDE locally.) > Out of curiousity (not trying to argue against including it), 1. What's the benefit of using this tool? 2. What's the benefit of including it in CDE? (I'm suspecting that a small standalone tool might get more distribution outside the CDE source, for dl size) 3. Who holds copyright on it? > > I say this because I recently finished generating a new copyright file > > for Motif 2.3.4, and that was a real pain. If it had meant tracking down > > half a dozen or more BSD-flavored licenses, it would have been > > significantly more difficult. MIT-style licenses are much nicer > > for a would-be distributor. > > > >> I read the section on licensing and why MIT is requested -- and from > >> that it would seem that those BSD licenses would be fine for future > >> relicensing (since they're obviously compatible with the LGPL, etc.) > > AFAICT, "Future relicensing" means "We want to release CDE under the MIT > > license eventually, but we can't right now. If you want to contribute, > > please do so under terms that will not impede *that* conversion." > > Ah. Good, thanks for clarifying! > > -Rob -- Isaac Dunham <ibid...@lavabit.com> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net _______________________________________________ cdesktopenv-devel mailing list cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel
