Michael Hein wrote:
>
> Pardon my ignorance of the licensing of Gecko......are you say this to
> illustrate the case of Gecko not being released under the dual license thus
> preventing the participation of the GPL folks or what?
Perhaps I should have said "Mozilla code" instead of using the Gecko part as
a specific example. The spirit of the MPL and the Mozilla project is to be
freely usable by as many projects as are interested--whether proprietary or
open source--as long as improvements to the MPL code itself are shared back.
Everyone agrees it's a serious flaw that a large class of open source
projects can't take advantage of Mozilla code; dual licensing is the
proposed approach to make Mozilla code more widely available, to accomplish
the original intent of the MPL and the Mozilla project.
I should note that I personally am opposed to the specific dual-licensing
scheme proposed. It doesn't merely fix the GPL compatibility problem, it
allows a GPL project to make improvements to Mozilla code without sharing
those changes back (by changing the license of existing files to GPL-only).
This is a violation of the fundamental idea behind the MPL, and as far as I
can tell wholly unnecessary to solve the license incompatibilities.
-Dan Veditz
