On 13-07-30 08:26 AM, Josh Leverette wrote:
I really don't think it's just him that the licensing terms aren't
suitable for/. /By using MPS, /every single line/ of Rust code ever
written would be freely requestable by any and every individual unless
the company writing the code took care to relicense MPS or to destroy
any connection MPS has to their code.
This is no way to make a new language accepted by the community,
especially not a FOSS community. If MPS would be happy to relicense
under the MIT for the whole of the FOSS community, I'm sure we would get
along just fine, or, if Rust were to drop MPS... but I don't see any way
for Rust to coexist with MPS with its current license.
We'd only be considering it under the (alleged) willingness for them to
make an acceptable license for us. They have indicated a certain
willingness to do so in the past, eg. for opendylan.
We are not considering, nor will we ever consider, adopting anything
into our standard libraries that causes licensing restrictions on
downstream authors of Rust code. This is why (sadly) we can't take LGPL
stuff into the stdlib either: downstream winds up needing to distribute
code in relinkable form. Not ok.
-Graydon
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
