Gervase Markham wrote:
> Mike Lee wrote:
>
>> I don't see the signifcant of GPL everything. Only advantage is people
>> can link mozilla to GPL program, but MPL will still be what mozilla is
>> distributed as, with GPL as alternative license. Since GPL will
>> essentually prevent third-party proprietary plugins.
>
>
> This is not correct. A dual license is disjunctive - you choose which
> license you'd like to work with the code under. So dual-licensing with
> the GPL does not prevent people using it under the MPL and adding
> proprietary files.
>
You miss understood me, what I mean is that mozilla will still have to
be distributed to MPL, there will be no migration to distibuting mozilla
primarilu as GPL. In other work there is no chance that GPL will be
included in the mozilla CVS as a standalone.
Mike
> Gerv
>
