In a message of Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:25:20 +0200, holger krekel writes: >Hi Harald, > >nice to hear from you! > >On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 15:21 +0200, Massa, Harald Armin wrote: >> Holger, >> >> the most practical reason: >> >> py.test should become the standard testing package for Python. There is > no >> better. >> >> the best of breed belongs to.... the standard library. >> >> and therefore the Python license is required, else it will be a non-sta >rter. >> >> IF py.test does not want to become the best of breed of testing package >s, >> what is the reason to exist, anyway?
Actually, assuming that you wanted to put your software into the python standard library -- I know that Holger doesn't, but this is just to make it clear to any of you who are reading this and might have such ambitions -- THE PSF RECOMMENDS THAT YOU DO NOT USE THE PYTHON LICENSE. THE PSF does not accept the PSF license, either. Indeed, the only two licenses which are currently acceptable are the Academic Free License http://www.opensource.org/licenses/afl-3.0.php and the Apache license 2.0. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apache2.0.php Read (some of the) gory details about why here: http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq And why can't Python relicense itself under a better license? Because the legal agreement that was entered into with CNRI prohibits changing the license. Just thought you should know this, even though Holger won't be affected since he doesn't want py.test to be part of the standard library. Laura _______________________________________________ py-dev mailing list py-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/py-dev
