On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 07:29:12PM -0800, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Bruce Perens wrote: > > OK - one might consider that it's one license _text_ rather than > > 4, but yes it's three licenses. Is it possible to sucessfully > > lobby Apache to get rid of the advertising clause? They probably > > have enough experience now to see it's had no positive effect. > > Um, no. We are talking about a rev of the Apache license to address > some concerns, but there are things about the current "advertising" > clause (you've read it recently, right? It's GPL compatible, we > believe) that are pretty positive for us.
According to http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses, neither v1.0 or 1.1 of the Apache License is GPL-compatible. The 1.1 license is on Apache 1.3.22 and what is currently 2.0 in development. -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
