On 16 April 2010 19:53, Antony Vennard <[email protected]> wrote: > In addition to the inline:- > > What's the news r.e. website? When do you want me to start putting > something together? Happy to take this discussion off-list if needs be.
Sure, I'm counting on it. And please, let's keep things *on list*. I can help with content. Do you have an idea what you want to use for this? You mentioned django, which I've heard good things about. Bill. > > Antony > > On 04/16/2010 07:37 PM, Bill Hart wrote: >> On 16 April 2010 19:32, Antony Vennard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 04/16/2010 07:20 PM, Bill Hart wrote: >>>> >>>> No because one of the conditions is to retain the list of conditions >>>> in redistributions, including the third clause. >>> >>> I thought it was too simple. 2-clause it is then. >> >> Well I was planning on saying it is preferred and leaving it up to >> contributors. The imperative here is to get more regular contribution, >> so whatever works really. > > Sounds good to me. Either or. I was just trying to see if there was a > way it would work out easier! > >>>>> >>>>> In my opinion, the only thing missing from the BSD license is copyleft - >>>>> that said, I can live without it, really - I'd rather use the BSD >>>>> license than the LGPL or even worse the GPL. >>>> >>>> The main thing missing is any form of patent protection. When using >>>> these licenses, one must simply request that people make known any >>>> patents which affect the project, and all code which might infringe >>>> has to be removed. You also ask your contributors to not contribute >>>> stuff over which they, or their companies are likely to hold a patent. >>>> But in practice, this seems to work for people using these licenses. >>>> They just agree to remove code if it becomes a problem. >>>> >>>> Of course there is nothing stopping someone from having a patent over >>>> something that is implemented under the GPL either. But the GPL does >>>> stop the contributor from contributing code over which they hold a >>>> patent. And if they do, they can't charge a royalty for its use. >>>> >>>> Come to think of it, now I am confused. How is BSD licensed code >>>> compatible with the GPL under these circumstances? If I merged BSD >>>> licensed code into my GPL'd project, how do I know the original >>>> contributor of the BSD code didn't take out a patent. >>> >>> I don't suppose you would, but the condition of merging into the GPL >>> would be that you had to take the patent out or surrender your right to >>> charge for it. I see what you mean though, you ought to be able to GPL >>> BSD licensed code and it should just work(tm), which it wouldn't... >> >> But people do this all the time. > > Hmmm... I don't know. Is there a legal person we could consult? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "mpir-devel" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
