On 2001.08.13 09:33:22 -0400 Aaron Mulder wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, David Jencks wrote:
> > How about:
> >
> > This software may be used under the terms of the X licence or the lgpl
> > licence. All current copyright holders grant permission that future
> > modifications may be released under either of
> > 1. this dual license
> > or
> > 2. the lgpl license alone
> > at the discretion of the copyright holder of the modifications.
>
> Look, I don't want to be a hard case here, but I don't think #2
> is
> legal. Could I take JBoss, make a number of customizations, and then
> keep
> my changes proprietary
My understanding of the x license is that exactly this is allowed, which is
why I am wondering how appropriate it is.
because I decided to "change the license for my
> modifications alone"?
lgpl prohibits this, so this cannot be done except by the copyright holder
for the majority of jboss.
No. That would defeat the whole point of the
> license, which is to keep the code open. We'd need something new to
> allow
> that, and I don't have the training to try to craft a new self-mutating
> license.
I don't either. I'm sure a lawyer could drive a large truck through my
suggestion.
> So I will be happy to support 1 (this code can be licensed either
> under the terms of the X license or under the terms of the LGPL license,
> at the discretion of the licensee). That would allow you to state
> that "all of JBoss is licensed under the LGPL." Would everyone be
> happier
> with that?
>
> Aaron
As far as I know, only the copyright holder can change the license terms,
so for instance I can't go and change "X license" to "lgpl" on jbosspool
code. As far as I am concerned, you (Aaron) will have to make any license
change you agree to.
Here are 2 more ideas:
1. (maybe I suggested this already, this is getting toooo looooong). We
tag the current version with a cvs tag saying "x license", and change the
license on the next version to lgpl, and include a comment that "previous
versions of this code may be used under the x license - look for the cvs
tag"
2. We change the license to lgpl, and each author states either:
@author<>......
The code copyright by author zzz may be alternatively used under the x
license
@author<>....
The code copyright by author yyy may be used only under the lgpl
Anyway, as far as I am concerned, you (Aaron) will have to change the
license, and if you don't change to (current tagged "x-license") and lgpl
alone, I will check in my modifications with a note allowing future release
under lgpl only.
I think (current tagged "x-license") and lgpl alone is the simplest for the
future but am reasonably happy with any of these possibilities.
david jencks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
