Now that the RFCs have been frozen and things look a bit calmer I would
like to take the chance to clear up a few misconceptions about the
ActivePerl license:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:38:35 +0200, "Philip Newton" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 25 Sep 2000, at 13:05, Ben Tilly wrote:
Is there
[Grabbing an old thread...]
Ben Tilly wrote:
My understanding is that the intent of the AL is to keep there from
being a proprietary derivative named perl with restricted source. (If it
is not named perl then that is explicitly allowed.)
I believe my draft of the Artistic License does
Chris Nandor wrote:
At 23:42 -0500 2000.09.24, David Grove wrote:
Whatever is done, it should be clear that a situation that exists today
should
not be permitted in the future. It should be impossible for a (corporate)
entity, based on the GPL, to restrict the redistribution of Perl, which
At 10:03 -0400 2000.09.25, Ben Tilly wrote:
Chris Nandor wrote:
At 23:42 -0500 2000.09.24, David Grove wrote:
Whatever is done, it should be clear that a situation that exists today
should
not be permitted in the future. It should be impossible for a (corporate)
entity, based on the GPL, to
David Grove wrote:
Um, distribution under the GPL has to include offers of source.
In fact the terms of the GPL are all designed to promote a very
specific philosophy that is counter to traditional commercial
practices!
True, but it hasn't always happened.
People do not always meet
David Grove wrote:
On Monday, September 25, 2000 7:01 AM, Chris Nandor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
At 23:42 -0500 2000.09.24, David Grove wrote:
Whatever is done, it should be clear that a situation that exists today
should
not be permitted in the future. It should be impossible for
David Grove wrote:
On Monday, September 25, 2000 9:16 AM, Chris Nandor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
Yes, but no one can restrict the redistribution of Perl (or perl). You
can, perhaps (though I am not entirely convinced), restrict the
distribution of some specific distribution, but
Is there anything that stops me from taking my binary copy
of Perl from ActiveState, cutting it to CD, and handing it to
someone else? I thought not!
You appear to be unfamiliar with ActiveState's license. It is specifically
prohibited from being redistributed without permission, from Perl
This is the nightmare of JavaScript. This is one of the reasons
that I prefer Perl over Java. This is...you know my opinion.
But I recognize the benefit as well. I don't think it is a
*bad* choice, but I think it is a choice to be made with open eyes
and recognition of the tradeoffs.
Whatever is done, it should be clear that a situation that exists today should
not be permitted in the future. It should be impossible for a (corporate)
entity, based on the GPL, to restrict the redistribution of Perl, which is a
right seemingly granted by the AL. The conbination of the GPL's
10 matches
Mail list logo