Greg London [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (in part)
It seems to me that the MIT does not meet
item #2 of the OSD, then. The APSL goes
above and beyond #2 requirements. But the
MIT license seems to fall short.
OSD #2 seems to be setting a clear minimum
requirement that source code must be
Greg London [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (in part)
It seems to me that the MIT does not meet
item #2 of the OSD, then.
An Open Source license is _not_ required to prohibit someone from making
a version of the software that is closed source. And since someone can
do that without changing the
Bruce Perens wrote:
Both the MIT license and Public Domain
fit under both the
OSD and RMS's definition of Free Software,
is it possible to take GPL'ed code,
modify it, relicense it under
a proprietary license, and distribute
it only in binary form?
my understanding is it is not possible.
begin Greg London quotation:
I am saying the MIT license does not meet OSD #2. Since OSD #2 says
the program MUST include source code There is nothing in the MIT
license to guarantee OSD#2, so it fails to meet the definition.
Ahem. Nostalgic for freshman philosophy?
It would be physically
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Greg London wrote:
is it possible to take GPL'ed code,
modify it, relicense it under
a proprietary license, and distribute
it only in binary form?
my understanding is it is not possible.
but MIT'ed code would allow this.
Irrelevant. Is it possible to take APSL'ed
begin Matthew C. Weigel quotation:
I also think that the OSD contributes to this misunderstanding - I
think the wording of the introduction should be rewritten to not
suggest the distribution terms have to meet the OSD, but the
distribution terms or the distribution itself.
Actually, I
On Tuesday 25 September 2001 02:31 pm, Greg London wrote:
I am saying the MIT license does not meet OSD #2.
Since OSD #2 says
the program MUST include source code
There is nothing in the MIT license to
guarantee OSD#2, so it fails to meet the
definition.
Fine. I distribute an MIT licensed
Rick Moen writes:
The existence of a set of guidelines fortunately doesn't bar the Board
-- or the rest of us -- from applying common sense. E.g., Sorry, but
software without source code cannot be open source.
Yup.
--
-russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells
8 matches
Mail list logo