The original email proposed either of MPL2 or APL2 for server code, so I'm 
assuming that's fine.

-- Mike

On 2013-02-13, at 6:08 PM, Peter Bengtsson wrote:

> I would be happy to use Apache2 instead of BSD if Gerv thinks that's better.
> 
> As Will pointed out, the Python open source peeps won't scream and laugh at 
> me for not using BSD on my non-MPL2 projects.
> 
> And if some someone thinks BSD is a million dollar better than Apache2, then 
> that's just tough. Time to progress!
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 13/02/2013 13:10, Wraithan (Chris McDonald) wrote:
>> Gerv,
>> 
>> Can't say I am keen on this. we are taking away the ability for us to
>> license things to fit into the community they are being built for? BSD
>> being the way of the vast majority of python/django projects. One of the
>> coolest things about Mozilla when I joined was this ability. The
>> knowledge that my hands wouldn't be tied if I made something neat.
>> 
>> It appears none of the discussion made any difference because you've
>> gone right back to what you were originally arguing for. I feel like the
>> discussion may have trailed off, but is still important and an agreement
>> was never come to.
>> 
>> I've CC'd webdev as there are a lot of us who feel strongly on this and
>> the email didn't go out to all of them.
>> 
>> To distil my disagreements:
>> 1) This takes away our ability to blend into communities we are a part of.
>> 2) Requires the extra work of consulting legal if when releasing
>> something we feel strongly should be more permissive or at least,
>> differently permissive.
>> 3) The discussion wasn't finished, it just happened to trail off in lieu
>> of other things/work/etc.
>> 
>> -Wraithan
>> 
>> On 2/13/13 8:46 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>>> Having taken in the various viewpoints, I suggest the next step is a
>>> concrete proposal. Here is one.
>>> 
>>> We should update the Mozilla License Policy[0]. On the particular topic
>>> of which license to choose for a new project, it should say:
>>> 
>>> "New Mozilla-originated software projects may choose either the MPL 2.0
>>> or the Apache License 2.0. No other license is acceptable. When
>>> integrating with, building on or relating to an existing codebase, the
>>> license of that codebase should be chosen. Otherwise, the licensing team
>>> recommends MPL 2.0 for client-side code, and either for server-side
>>> code. However, the decision should be taken on a case-by-case basis in
>>> consultation with the licensing team."
>>> 
>>> Gerv
>>> 
>>> [0] http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/license-policy.html
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> legal mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-webdev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-webdev
> _______________________________________________
> legal mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal

_______________________________________________
legal mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal

Reply via email to