On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Niclas Hedhman wrote:

On Tuesday 21 December 2004 00:02, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:


The Jini technology is going Open Source and I think that is great, and even though I tried hard, it will not be under a ASL2.0 license, most likely the MIT license.

I always thought the MIT licence was just the same as the BSD 1.1 licence. The GNU page lists a couple under that name (X11 License and Expat License). It'd be interesting to know why the MIT licence in particular is desired, I thought it was quite out of fashion nowadays.

Now, hasn't their been licensing disputes from (L)GPL camps, IIRC JBoss??
Where they were accusing the ASF of breach of licensing.
Can't ASF pay back with the same coins, referring to their own authority (FSF)
about that the licensing is incompatible...

From our point of view, ASL licenced code may be used in such products, so
whether the FSF might have an issue or not with them is not in our realm of interest.

I'm also pretty sure that we're not looking for "pay back with the same coins".


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to