tx for the precision.
>>> I'm not sure anyone really answered the question.
>>>
>>> (a) Yes you can build squeak/pharo VM based applications for the iOS
>>> platform and distribute in the App Store. This assumes you adhere to the
>>> rules.
>>>
>>> (b) Yes you can build Squeak/pharo VM based applications for the OS-X
>>> platform and distribute in the OS-X App Store. This assumes someone wants
>>> to take the time to port the file dialog logic from Sophie to Pharo since
>>> you will be rejected if you present a Squeak file open/save dialog.
>>>
>>> Thanks John.
>>>
>>> Is the licence of Sophie file dialog code MIT ?
>>
>> Yes but we do not really want to have the copyright of a university in
>> pharo. This is why alain rewrote from scratch the undo.
>>
> Actually, the problem was that it is BSD... which is not the faullt of
> Sophie, this was what was thought as being good at that point
> in time. Later people understood that MIT is even better...
>
> Wikepedia says:
>
> The MIT License is similar to the 3-clause "modified" BSD license,
> except that the BSD license contains a notice prohibiting the use of the name
> of the
> copyright holder in promotion. This is sometimes present in versions
> of the MIT License, as noted above.
> The original BSD license also includes a clause requiring all
> advertising of the software to display a notice crediting its authors.
> This "advertising clause" (since disavowed by UC Berkeley[7]) is
> present in the modified MIT License used by XFree86.
>
> The MIT License states more explicitly the rights given to the
> end-user, including the right to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
> distribute, sublicense, and/or
> sell the software.
>
> For the Undo it was nor really worth to think about what it means to add BSD
> (and which of the BSD?) licensed code to an MIT licensed system...
>
> Marcus
>
> --
> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de
> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
>
>
