Thank you for the page, Owen. I had hoped the licensing discussions were at an end, but evidently not.
On Dec 3, 7:14 pm, "Chris Meller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I explained on IRC [1], I don't think it's right to refuse to accept GPL > code to the -extras repository, since the GPLv3 is compatible with the ASL. > If we want to hold Habari core to a higher standard, that's one thing. > Holding Extras to that higher standard doesn't make any sense and seriously > limits its usefulness. > > Take, for example, some of the plugins Skippy has written lately... They > include GPL code and so aren't included in Extras. Just today, moeffju was > on IRC wanting to fix the plugin for the new ACL changes and wasn't able to > because only Skippy is able to maintain them. > > Likewise, michaeltwofish earlier mentioned wanting to port some themes to > Habari, but not having the desire to commit to them as the sole maintainer. > Disallowing GPLv3 from Extras causes these problems. > > On a less "legal" or "technical" note, I just find that it rubs me the wrong > way to say "We allow ASL or ASL-compatible code... oh, except the GPL. We > don't like the GPL and won't let you play in our sandbox with it." > I'll willingly say I don't like the GPL. Part of the problem is that the GPL does say it "won't let you play in our sandbox" regarding other licenses. If any part of a piece of software uses GPL, my understanding is that the entire piece of software has to be licensed under the GPL. To quote from your third reference. "..both GPLv2 and GPLv3 are copyleft licenses: each of them says, “If you include code under this license in a larger program, the larger program must be under this license too.” I would hardly call that playing well with others. Further, the ASF position is to specifically disallow inclusion of code in Apache products which uses any version of the GPL or LGPL license ( http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html ). If the ASF doesn't feel comfortable using GPL or LGPL code in ASL projects, I'd feel more comfortable if we didn't do so either, even though your third reference says the GPL3 is compatible with the ASL. There is obviously a disconnect between the two parties. GPL software has it's place, but providing server space for it would, in my opinion, be counterproductive to encouraging people to use the ASL. I agree with Michael that simplicity and clarity have a lot going for them. The ambiguity surrounding the compatibility between the GPL3/ LGPL and the ASL has engendered way too much discussion, enough to show the situation isn't as clear as you may think. If the two primary parties ever agree, inclusion of GPL/LGPL works may be worth revisiting, but for now the lack of clarity is enough to warrant not allowing them. Rick > As I've been saying in the SuperGlobals thread: educate, don't eliminate. We > should explain our reasons for loving the ASL and heavily encourage users to > use only it, but not eliminate GPL entirely and prevent anyone from using > the thousands of libraries licensed under it in their Extras plugins. That > will only stifle creativity and de-centralize our centralized repository. > > And, per the GPL site, every NOTICE that ships with GPL software says it is > licensed under version 2 or any higher version [2] and that v3 is > ASL-compatible [3]. Just to clear that up. > > [1]:http://drunkenmonkey.org/irc/habari/2008-12-03#T23-31-28 > [2]:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html#SEC4 > [3]:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html(very end) > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Michael Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > > > > 2008/12/4 Owen Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I've written a page on the wiki detailing the policy for use of the > > > extras repo. > > > > Please review and comment: > > >http://wiki.habariproject.org/en/Extras_Repository > > > The licensing section of this page is likely to be contentious, > > especially this: "One example exception is GPL-licensed work. While > > some authorities suggest that GPLv3 is compatible with ASL, in order > > to remove any ambiguity over what is allowed no plugins or themes > > should be committed to the extras repository that use any version of > > the GPL license." > > > I am in favour of disallowing GPL licensed works. I think we should > > make it as clear and simple as possible for contributors to know what > > can and can't be put in the -extras repo. We all know that licensing > > is hard, and because it's hard most people try not to think about it. > > Let's make it easy for people to not think about it, even if it means > > some stuff can't be put in -extras. > > > -- > > Michael C. Harris, School of CS&IT, RMIT University > >http://twofishcreative.com/michael/blog > > IRC: michaeltwofish #habari > > -- > > Bertrand Russell - "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be > wrong." --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
