Edwin Goei wrote:
>
> Jeff Turner wrote:
> >
> > It's under the Mozilla Public License 1.1, for historical reasons (it's
> > APL-compatible, right?).
>
> What does "APL" stand for? If you mean the Apache license, then no, I
> do not think MPL is compatible with the Apache license. MPL is more
> restrictive.
Careful.
some comments:
1) APL normally stands for Apple Public License.
2) Apache License is normally referred to as the "ASFL" to avoid the
above collision.
3) yes, the MPL is more restrictive than the ASFL (on IP rights, for
example)
4) *but* the MPL doesn't restrict the inclusion of code licensed in
anyother license, it just doesn't touch that part (unlike the GPL which
covers everything it touches).
In this sense *yes* the MPL is fully compatible and interoperable with
the ASFL since we can include MPL code and MPL code can include ASFL
code.
Hope this helps.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
