Hi, On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 10:50, Chris Gray wrote: > > Although The Boss is now back, I haven't yet cornered him to double-check > this. However I'm sure that to get into our main source tree, code would > need to be assigned to us, or at least released under a licence no more > restrictive than BSD: anything else would need to be "quarantined" to > prevent it from leaking into a BSD'd or binary-only product. IOW it would > be an "external library" from out POV.
What is so restrictive about the GNU Classpath license that you cannot use it? It is the weakest copyleft that I know of. Although I would like GNU Classpath to use the normal GPL or LGPL we already made the compromise to use this rather weak copyleft to get the libgcj hackers on board. And it seems to have worked to produce more free software for now. It is a pity we weren't able to clarify the license enough back in January when Etienne Gagnon was pushing for this so that we could accept his contributions. I am not to eager about going into a license discussion again, but if there is a possibility that it would lead to Acunia contributing to GNU Classpath it might be worth it. (Of course being a GNU project in the end the FSF decides about all licensing issues so if you do not want to go into it on the mailinglist then please ask Brian about how and who to contact "higher up".) Cheers, Mark _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
