On Wednesday 05 July 2006 23:02, Shlomi Fish n wrote: > I don't see using the X11 licence for my software as anti-social. Like I > said, anyone can easily fork it as a software of a different licence.
Supposing you actually find a mentee and TPF actually does fund this project and this code is substantially better than Test::Harness such that it is an obvious candidate for inclusion in the Perl core. It must be under the Perl license. Now there is a fork of a fork, as the code that makes it into the core has an incompatible license with your fork. (Do NOT assert, yet again without proof or a demonstratable understanding of the problem, that there exists a trivial solution. The linking clause of the GPL is hardly a new or poorly understood legal invention, for example.) I am not sure what to call this, but I do know that it is not a viable long term strategy for anyone else. How is your refusal to follow community norms (or, I suppose, to work with an amenable maintainer) anything *but* anti-social? I suppose "copy-and-relicense forking" is as good a description as any. That is not a complimentary description, by the way. -- c
