Re: [Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
On 22 Jun 2001, Simon Michael wrote: Now here, I have to assume RMS is using combine above to mean combine and redistribute. I hope I'm right ? If combine included install zwiki on your zope installation and use it then everything I know is wrong.. I did intend for that to be fairly danger-free. I'm not sure, I've fired off another email to get a clarification. While we're one the topic, I just read an article [1] over at Kuro5hin that could enlighten the management over at Digicool and us as well; it discusses the impacts of Free Software and relates it to Free Trade, talks about barriers and other interesting things. From the practical point of view, being able to use GPL-ed software with Zope is a Good Thing (TM) for most developers. Another thing is that some people / companies may be reluctant to add signifcant modules that could be included in the Zope core, as they will not get the same level of recognition for their work as Digital Creations would. For me personally, a Zope license without the advertising clause would motivate me, as the 'protection barrier' / 'restriction' / 'attribution issue' wouldn't be there; I have a ton of things I'd like to change in Zope and add to Zope, and as time goes by, the who-gets-credit-issue will undoubtedly be raised again, if we're so lucky that Digicool decides to open up Zope for read/write CVS access. [1] http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/23/3451/16661 -Morten ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Thanks for a most illuminating thread. Slight clarification to a comment of yours Shane - Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GPL code together. ZWiki is just in a strange position because the GPL is not actually in effect. I'm not sure I'd use those words - the license is certainly fully in effect, I'd say, if not exactly enforced by a battalion of lawyers. One of the consequences being that someone re-distributing zope zwiki together, under their default licenses, is technically in violation right now, I think we are all agreeing. I'm not aware of anyone doing this right now, though there was a zwiki package for Debian GNU/linux at one point. Would Debian be in violation shipping both zope zwiki packages on a cd ? If they thought so, sooner or later one or the other would get dropped from the distribution. Unfortunate and detrimental to both zwiki and zope. In principle this would apply to all linux distributions. Does this serve as an example of a problem with the current situation for DC management ? Another would be the fact that DC's own options are limited if it (DC) ever had the desire to distribute or sell something leveraging zwiki. Sure, it could convince me that LGPL makes better sense, or offer me a large sum of money to draw up a special alternate license (hey, on the double :-). But this would have to be repeated with each developer where the situation arose. Probably better to update the ZPL to solve this problem in one sweep, ensure that zope is participating fully within the preeminent sphere of software creativity, and earn a whole bunch of new support from the world developer community. And python did it. And there's no downside to making yourself GPL-compatible that I can think of. Explain why it's important to you and why you can't get by on the current situation. You can send them directly or I can forward emails to the management. Thanks Shane, please forward. DC management, please consider yourself lobbied - I'd like to encourage you to review the situation and consider making some adjustments to zope's license, or join our discussion here. Best regards -Simon ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
On 22 Jun 2001 09:33:22 -0700, Simon Michael wrote: Thanks for a most illuminating thread. Slight clarification to a comment of yours Shane - Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GPL code together. ZWiki is just in a strange position because the GPL is not actually in effect. I'm not sure I'd use those words - the license is certainly fully in effect, I'd say, if not exactly enforced by a battalion of lawyers. One of the consequences being that someone re-distributing zope zwiki together, under their default licenses, is technically in violation right now, I think we are all agreeing. right. I'm not aware of anyone doing this right now, though there was a zwiki package for Debian GNU/linux at one point. Would Debian be in violation shipping both zope zwiki packages on a cd ? If they thought so, sooner or later one or the other would get dropped from the distribution. Unfortunate and detrimental to both zwiki and zope. In principle this would apply to all linux distributions. not only. i can assure you that somebody in debian find even a single line of gpl code in the zope main packge zope will be removed from the distribution until license compatibility is (re)estabilished. same story for zope products currently available in debian. i don't have all that time, so i wont be the guy doing that, but, first or later, someone will surely try to track down all the licens incompatibilities in zope debian packages. just look at the kde/qt problem (now fortunately resolved...) Does this serve as an example of a problem with the current situation for DC management ? Another would be the fact that DC's own options are limited if it (DC) ever had the desire to distribute or sell something leveraging zwiki. Sure, it could convince me that LGPL makes better sense, or offer me a large sum of money to draw up a special alternate license (hey, on the double :-). But this would have to be repeated with each developer where the situation arose. right. maybe dc has some to gain froma gpl-compatible zope and not only the no-harm i detailed before. Probably better to update the ZPL to solve this problem in one sweep, ensure that zope is participating fully within the preeminent sphere of software creativity, and earn a whole bunch of new support from the world developer community. And python did it. And there's no downside to making yourself GPL-compatible that I can think of. absolutely. ciao, federico -- Federico Di Gregorio MIXAD LIVE Chief of Research Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux Developer Italian Press Contact[EMAIL PROTECTED] 99.% still isn't 100% but sometimes suffice. -- Me ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
On Friday 22 June 2001 12:33, Simon Michael wrote: Thanks for a most illuminating thread. Slight clarification to a comment of yours Shane - Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GPL code together. ZWiki is just in a strange position because the GPL is not actually in effect. I'm not sure I'd use those words - the license is certainly fully in effect, I'd say, if not exactly enforced by a battalion of lawyers. Agreed. The GPL tends to make it difficult to nail down precise words. I think that's one reason people get into GPL shouting matches. One of the consequences being that someone re-distributing zope zwiki together, under their default licenses, is technically in violation right now, I think we are all agreeing. Technically yes, although I like to think that the product developers implicitly grant redistribution permission by attempting to apply the GPL. Does this serve as an example of a problem with the current situation for DC management ? I've forwarded your message and Federico's. Thanks! Probably better to update the ZPL to solve this problem in one sweep, ensure that zope is participating fully within the preeminent sphere of software creativity, and earn a whole bunch of new support from the world developer community. I think you're right. The reaction to the Python license becoming GPL compatible wasn't as enthusiastic as I expected, though. Thanks Shane, please forward. DC management, please consider yourself lobbied - I'd like to encourage you to review the situation and consider making some adjustments to zope's license, or join our discussion here. I'll let you know when they reply. Or maybe they will. Shane ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One of the consequences being that someone re-distributing zope zwiki together, under their default licenses, is technically in violation right now, I think we are all agreeing. Technically yes, although I like to think that the product developers implicitly grant redistribution permission by attempting to apply the GPL. I'm not sure that would be a valid assumption. Speaking for myself, it wasn't my particular intention to unconditionally grant that permission given the licenses as they stand. I mean, I didn't intend that zwiki's GPL be some kind of watered-down GPL. :) I think you're right. The reaction to the Python license becoming GPL compatible wasn't as enthusiastic as I expected, though. Well, I'm guessing there was a shout of joy around the world - it made my day. I think many of us then said well thank god for some sanity and got on with the productive work that needed doing. Unfortunately the positive reactions are less apparent than the kind we have when disaster is looming. Cheers -Simon ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Dear Digital Creations, Thank you for providing Zope. Please consider releasing it under the GPL. As a non-profit organization that is recruiting and training volunteers to develop code for our web site that runs on Zope, the license uncertainty is wasting our time and may force us to abandon Zope as a core element of our technology platform. Zope takes advantage of a body of work and a community of people made possible by the pioneering efforts of the Free Software Foundation, source of the General Public License (GPL). Now that Python itself is being distributed under a GPL-compatible license, you could save everyone a lot of time and grief by clarifying your business model and the relationship you would like to have with your development community. Offering developers the choice to obtain Zope under the GPL would send a clear message that you value us. I would love to discuss the issues in detail with you or your legal counsel by e-mail in a public forum. Perhaps a zope-license mailing list would be useful to all concerned. Sincerely, Fred Wilson Horch, JD Boalt Hall School of Law, UC Berkeley '95 Development Editor, High Technology Law Journal '94 - '95 -- Fred Wilson Horch mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Executive Director, EcoAccess http://ecoaccess.org/ P.O. Box 2823, Durham, NC 27715-2823phone: 919.419-8567 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 01:16:04PM -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote: I think you're right. The reaction to the Python license becoming GPL compatible wasn't as enthusiastic as I expected, though. Are you talking about the reactions on Slashdot.org? The reactions there were exactly as to be expected; uninformed and unintelligent. And those are the posts that get score 3 and up, I never read Slashdot posts below that. -- Martijn Pieters | Software Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com/ | Creators of Zope http://www.zope.org/ - ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
On 22 Jun 2001, Simon Michael wrote: Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One of the consequences being that someone re-distributing zope zwiki together, under their default licenses, is technically in violation right now, I think we are all agreeing. Technically yes, although I like to think that the product developers implicitly grant redistribution permission by attempting to apply the GPL. I'm not sure that would be a valid assumption. Speaking for myself, it wasn't my particular intention to unconditionally grant that permission given the licenses as they stand. I mean, I didn't intend that zwiki's GPL be some kind of watered-down GPL. :) May Stallman forgive me (fun intended :-): Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:43:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Mixing different licences Another question is whether or not it's legal to use GPL-ed Zope products with Zope. That is a hard question. I don't know whether Zope is just an interpreter or contains facilities that, in effect, the user program links with. It makes a difference. If the former, you can run programs on Zope regardless of their licenses. If the latter, then in general, you can't take someone's GPL-covered code and combine it with Zope, because the Zope license is GPL-incompatible. If someone wrote a GPL-covered program specifically for Zope, you are pretty safe taking that as implicit permission to combine it with Zope. But it would be better for them to give explicit permission. Implicitly yours, Morten ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Morten W. Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:43:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Richard Stallman snip If the latter, then in general, you can't take someone's GPL-covered code and combine it with Zope, because the Zope license is GPL-incompatible. If someone wrote a GPL-covered program specifically for Zope, you are pretty safe taking that as implicit permission to combine it with Zope. But it would be better for them to give explicit permission. Now here, I have to assume RMS is using combine above to mean combine and redistribute. I hope I'm right ? If combine included install zwiki on your zope installation and use it then everything I know is wrong.. I did intend for that to be fairly danger-free. -Simon ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Steve Drees [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here comes the liscence wars again. Nope. Please don't drag down a constructive thread. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPL and GPL licensing issues
Jan-Oliver Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The license dicussion takes place elsewhere as all of you surely know. License wars tend to come up at various places but are usually not competent discussions. With respect - loose talk of license wars should be avoided. What you say is true but not relevant to this thread. These issues are not basic, and they matter most to zope developers. I think this is a very good place for those who are interested to have a discussion about them. -Simon ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
