On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > The result is a license that is compatible with other open source > licenses, such as the GPL, and yet still remains true to the > original goals of the Apache Group and supportive of collaborative > development across both nonprofit and commercial organizations.
Has Eben Moglen (or the FSF) commented on the compatibility with ASL 2.0 and the GPL, specifically regarding the interaction of �3 of the ASL with �7 of the GPL? [I personally haven't seen such a public commentary regarding the recent revisions of the license and their GPL compatibility if they do exist...] Until he (or the FSF) has, calling the ASL 2.0 a GPL compatible license is premature for the reasons outlined in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as well as in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, I'd suggest avoiding caracterizing it as such until he (or the FSF) makes some sort of statement on the issue. [That being said, I'm not sure if GPL compatibility is an issue for works under the ASL, but if it is, it's something that should be discussed in further detail.] Don Armstrong -- I'd sign up in a hot second for any cellular company whose motto was: "We're less horrible than a root canal with a cold chisel." -- Cory Doctorow http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
