It seems like the relicensing is already going on. Did I miss any
announcements or hasn't this been announced on .license?
I find it somewhat irritating that you now change (NPL code) to the dual
license, although my understanding was that you wanted to ask each and
every contributor for
On 20/09/2001 at 14:55 Gervase Markham wrote:
You have the wrong end of the stick. It's not that way round, it's the
other way round - developers who want to combine our code with GPLed
apps. We still aren't letting GPLed code into the tree. For one example
of a group who want to use our code
On 20/09/2001 at 15:00 Gervase Markham wrote:
This is not the case. Let's do a thought experiment:
You have a file of code. You make three copies and put one of the
license header from the MPL, LGPL and GPL on each one. Whenever you make
changes to the file, you update all three copies. If
Simon P. Lucy wrote:
However this is not the case, there are not three files but one.
Think of it like Breathsavers mints; every Mozilla file is 3 files in one. When
you license your code out you can pick which of the 3 you want to use, or you
can relicense it as all 3. And, being the copyright
license
header from the MPL, LGPL and GPL on each one. Whenever you make
changes to the file, you update all three copies. If someone wants to
use the file, he picks which copy to use. If you are, for example,
Netscape,
However this is not the case, there are not three files but one.
On 20/09/2001 at 21:45 jesus X wrote:
Simon P. Lucy wrote:
However this is not the case, there are not three files but one.
Think of it like Breathsavers mints; every Mozilla file is 3 files in one.
No it isn't, there is only one file. Legally its a single entity. This idea of it
being
On 20/09/2001 at 19:04 Gervase Markham wrote:
license
header from the MPL, LGPL and GPL on each one. Whenever you make
changes to the file, you update all three copies. If someone wants to
use the file, he picks which copy to use. If you are, for example,
Netscape,
However this is not
This is not the case. Let's do a thought experiment:
You have a file of code. You make three copies and put one of the
license header from the MPL, LGPL and GPL on each one. Whenever you make
changes to the file, you update all three copies. If someone wants to
use the file, he picks which
Daniel Veditz wrote:
Note that there are at least two folks--Simon Lucy and myself--who
object to specifics in the current proposal for dual licensing (though
not the concept itself) on the same grounds that GPL zealots dislike
non-GPL licenses. It would allow people to turn the code
