On Apr 25, 2008, at 11:19 AM, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Brian Granger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Robert Bradshaw >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Apr 25, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I must admit I've never read the PSF license until today. >>>> However, Cython >>> is >>>> officially licensed under the PSF license. That doesn't really >>>> make sense, >>> as >>>> this license is specific to Python itself. It is a license >>>> between the PSF >>> and >>>> the users of Python - however, we can't speak for the PSF, and >>>> thus can't >>>> really decide to distribute software under that license... >>>> >>>> I don't think the PSF will complain about this status, but wouldn't >>> something >>>> like the MIT or BSD license help us get back into state "legal" >>>> here? >>>> >>> >>> Good point. We chose the PSF license because we want to make it >>> easy to >>> become part of the Python standard library (or at least be used >>> everywhere >>> Python itself can be), and didn't want the hassle of worrying about >>> re-licensing later on. >>> >>> As you mention, and is explained in more detail here, PSF >>> doesn't work. >>> >>> http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq >>> >>> I propose that we go with the Apache 2.0 as per their suggestion >>> (MIT and >>> BSD are nice, but then would we worry about having to re-license >>> later on? >>> I'm not sure.) >> >> I am not very familiar with the Apache 2.0 license. But, I am not >> sure I follow you about BSD/MIT making it difficult to relicense >> later. Could you elaborate? >> >> Also, what are the main reasons for going with the Apache 2.0 >> license? >> BSD/MIT seem like they might be better suited for general purpose >> projects. Just curious. > > Does all code that goes into Python have to have its > copyright signed over to the PSF? Or do they just requite > that code have the PSF license, but anybody can have the > copright? That's the real issue here. > > Currently everybody who contributes > to Cython has copyright on their contributions. > > This could be a problem.
No. The relevant document is here: http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ The sticking point seems to be that they want permission to re- license the code themselves, namely under the PSF license. We want to make it easy to give them this permission when the time comes. How to best go about doing this I'm not totally sure, but choosing an acceptable license is a step in the right direction. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list Cython-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
