On 14/02/13 14:14, Mike Connor wrote: > I thought about that, but do we really have a consensus that copyleft is > preferred by the project as a whole?
Sorry for the delay in getting back to this. I've been trying to talk to Mitchell, and she's very busy :-) I spoke to her this morning about it. > of consensus, I am reluctant to enshrine any preference in an official > policy. The bottom line is that up to now we have been "MPL 2.0 only", and this proposal is already a significant liberalization of that policy. To put it another way, official policy already enshrines a preference. Further liberalizations would require community-wide support for them to be demonstrated. So if you want to get together a coalition of people to make the case for a further change, you are welcome to do that. But for now, we are going to stick with my original proposal with a modified sentence 5: "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. Please consult the licensing team before going against its recommendations." Gerv _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
