On 5 jul, 00:05, "Mike Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Jonas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > We are building an end-user application from a web framework that give
> > us the freedom to choose the license of our application. Then, what is
> > the problem? We are not building a library for Pylons with GPL
> > license.
>
> I thought it was a blog component for use in larger Pylons
> applications. To me that's the same as a library. Inasmuch as it's a
> standalone application, I don't care what the license is. But it was
> presented on this list as a solution to the general need for a Pylons
> blog component. All I'm saying is its GPL status prevents it from
> fully meeting that need because it can't be used everywhere Pylons
> can. In order to be fully effective, Pylons eventually needs
> components for blogging, CRUD, CMS, etc, that can be plugged into
> applications. That's why Zope is so popular because it has these
> things. Not in the core, and not necessarily written in Pylons, but
> easy to integrate.
Well, the surest thing is that AroundWord will be divided in another
components in order that they could be used in others applications.
But its license will be GPL-similar.
> > Or perhaps, do you claim that all applications created with Pylons
> > have to be MIT or New BSD? If it is like that, say it clearly.
>
> There has been a de facto gentlemen's agreement that Python packages
> should be released with a BSD-like license so they can be used
> everywhere Python can, especially those that are meant to be imported
> into other programs. There was never a formal "agreement" on this
> that I know of but if you look around, 99% of the Python packages that
> have been released over the past ten years have been that way. So
> finding a GPL on what I (perhaps mistakenly) thought was a Pylons
> component felt like a slap in the face. I give my code to you with
> few restrictions, you give your code to me with larger restrictions
> that are not customary in the Python world. That's what made it feel
> so acute, that this was the *first* GPL Python program I'd
> encountered.
The Python language modules are released under the Python License that
is compatible with GNU GPL. If there has been this agreement it
doesn't want to say that it should force the people to license it BSD-
like.
I remind you that Plone, a popular CMS built in python and using Zope
as base, is licensed under GNU GPL. And that the others best CMS are
all GPL as WordPress, Drupal, or Joomla.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
