Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-27 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
hi, i wanted to draw myself from this thread before annoying the whole list, so i'll take paul mail as an excuse to write some final comments. On 27 Jun 2001 09:06:16 -0400, Paul Everitt wrote: 1) I wanted to specifically address something in Michael's post here. We fully expect people to

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-27 Thread Paul Everitt
With great trepidation, I add a post to this thread. As Barry has mentioned, this has all been discussed a LOT. I'll try to summarize and clarify a few points: 1) I wanted to specifically address something in Michael's post here. We fully expect people to profit from Zope, even if that

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-27 Thread Paul Everitt
I'd like to add a quick clarification, then I'll reply more later. Frederico brought up a good point that indicated I wasn't clear. It is a *desire* of ours to be GPL-compatible. Not a requirement, as it can be awfully tricky, complicated, and time-consuming to get there. But we've told

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-27 Thread Erik Enge
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Paul Everitt wrote: It is a *desire* of ours to be GPL-compatible. Not a requirement, as it can be awfully tricky, complicated, and time-consuming to get there. But we've told people that we're intending to give it a shot. That's much appretiated :)

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-27 Thread R.
On 27 Jun 2001 09:06:16 -0400, Paul Everitt wrote: With great trepidation, I add a post to this thread. As Barry has mentioned, this has all been discussed a LOT. I'll try to summarize and clarify a few points: 1) I wanted to specifically address something in Michael's post here. We

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread Barry A. Warsaw
JA == Jerome Alet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JA For Zope it's not sure, but for Python, as well as for all JA what people usually call open source languages, the license JA of choice should be the GPL, or at least the LGPL, in order JA for the language in question to not become

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 26 Jun 2001 00:29:05 +0200, Erik Enge wrote: On 25 Jun 2001, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: Other than keeping the door open for this eventuality, is there any other reason to choose a BSD style license over the GPL? Yes. A commercial one; an imperative one. If I make a Zope Python

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 26 Jun 2001 09:30:49 +1000, Richard Jones wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 05:22, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: On 25 Jun 2001 10:26:10 -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote: According to management, there's a zope-license list somewhere and we expect to move to a GPL compatible license. Paul says:

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 26 Jun 2001 10:29:39 +1000, Anthony Baxter wrote: Michael R. Bernstein wrote Unless I've misunderstood something (which is certainly possible), DC doesn't seem to have anything to lose by switching from a BSD style license to the GPL (or a GPL style license with an additional

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 25 Jun 2001 21:54:16 +0200, Jerome Alet wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:22:32PM -0700, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: Other than keeping the door open for this eventuality, is there any other reason to choose a BSD style license over the GPL? ... Unless I've misunderstood something

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 26 Jun 2001 09:46:09 +0200, Erik Enge wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jerome Alet wrote: For Zope it's not sure, but for Python, as well as for all what people usually call open source languages, the license of choice should be the GPL, or at least the LGPL, in order for the language in

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread R.
On 26 Jun 2001 10:30:06 -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote: JA == Jerome Alet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JA For Zope it's not sure, but for Python, as well as for all JA what people usually call open source languages, the license JA of choice should be the GPL, or at least the LGPL,

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread A.J. Rossini
MRB == Michael R Bernstein Michael writes: MRB On 26 Jun 2001 10:30:06 -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote: JA == Jerome Alet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JA For Zope it's not sure, but for Python, as well as for all JA what people usually call open source languages, the license

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread Erik Enge
On 26 Jun 2001, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: DC has been up-fron about how they make money. They do so by selling development services using Zope as a toolkit/platform. Yes, and forcing those paying customers to use GPL is very hard (and not very nice, either). Well, I guess the issue is

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread Anthony Baxter
Michael R. Bernstein wrote I guess I don't understand how licensing Python under the GPL would prevent people from writing proprietary software in Python. embedded or frozen python. I know I'd much rather see Python embedded in applications than Tcl or (god help us all)

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread Hannu Krosing
Jerome Alet wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Erik Enge wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jerome Alet wrote: Java comes to mind, guess who is the powerful entity ;-) I really can't see that Java has been bastardized by it, though. I was told that some java programs only run under windows,

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-26 Thread Hannu Krosing
Jerome Alet wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Anthony Baxter wrote: Jerome Alet wrote I personnally would love to see both Python and Zope be GPLed. Why? No really. Exactly what do you gain from this? Assuming Zope's license becomes GPL compatible, any packages you release you can

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-dev]ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-25 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 07:49:40PM -0700, ender wrote: On Saturday 23 June 2001 11:20, Erik Enge wrote: [Simon Michael] | Now you're talking. Seconded. Me too! i'd very much like to see a GPL compatible zope license as well, both for products i create and to integrate with third

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread R.
On 25 Jun 2001 10:26:10 -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote: According to management, there's a zope-license list somewhere and we expect to move to a GPL compatible license. Paul says: I think the goal should be for Zope and Python to converge on the same license, with perhaps the new license

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Jerome Alet
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:22:32PM -0700, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: Other than keeping the door open for this eventuality, is there any other reason to choose a BSD style license over the GPL? ... Unless I've misunderstood something (which is certainly possible), DC doesn't seem to have

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Erik Enge
On 25 Jun 2001, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: Other than keeping the door open for this eventuality, is there any other reason to choose a BSD style license over the GPL? Yes. A commercial one; an imperative one. If I make a Zope Python Product, I must license it as GPL to be able to

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Erik Enge
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Shane Hathaway wrote: (Paul says:) I think the goal should be for Zope and Python to converge on the same license, with perhaps the new license being some off-the-shelf license like Apache's. Wow, lobbying the management team at DC is pretty easy ;-). It's good to see

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Richard Jones
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 05:22, Michael R. Bernstein wrote: On 25 Jun 2001 10:26:10 -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote: According to management, there's a zope-license list somewhere and we expect to move to a GPL compatible license. Paul says: I think the goal should be for Zope and Python to

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Anthony Baxter
Jerome Alet wrote I personnally would love to see both Python and Zope be GPLed. Why? No really. Exactly what do you gain from this? Assuming Zope's license becomes GPL compatible, any packages you release you can choose to GPL. Why do you think having the GPL is a good thing for the core

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL

2001-06-25 Thread Anthony Baxter
Michael R. Bernstein wrote Unless I've misunderstood something (which is certainly possible), DC doesn't seem to have anything to lose by switching from a BSD style license to the GPL (or a GPL style license with an additional optional attribution clause), and quite a bit to gain. They

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-dev]ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-23 Thread Erik Enge
[Simon Michael] | Now you're talking. Seconded. Me too! And if the management team really needs alot of serious breakdowns as to why this is a problem (GPL-incompatability, that is) let me know and I'll drum up a nice little mail of my own. :) ___

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Erik Enge
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Shane Hathaway wrote: Now, if the ZPL were GPL compatible, the GPL would be in full effect for products. Digital Creations would automatically have the rights to redistribute derivatives of ZWiki. I believe DC would even be able to distribute ZWiki with Zope as long as

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Morten W. Petersen
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Erik Enge wrote: Now I think I have two different answers to one of my fundamental questions in this discussion: if I have a GPL-compatible licensed product and I distribute it with a GPL product, do I need to relicense the former one to GPL? Because that is what I

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Erik Enge
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Morten W. Petersen wrote: Yes, you can distribute a GPL-compatible licensed code with GPL licensed code without licencing the former under GPL. Take a look in the Linux-kernel source tree for example. Ok, good. Then Thingamy's intermediate solution will be to create a

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Morten W. Petersen
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Erik Enge wrote: Ok, good. Then Thingamy's intermediate solution will be to create a TPL which is basically the ZPL with the incompatible-clauses ripped out (number 4 and 7, I think). That way we are compatible with both the ZPL and the GPL. Something like that.

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Shane Hathaway
On Friday 22 June 2001 04:24, Erik Enge wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Shane Hathaway wrote: Now, if the ZPL were GPL compatible, the GPL would be in full effect for products. Digital Creations would automatically have the rights to redistribute derivatives of ZWiki. I believe DC would even

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 22 Jun 2001 10:29:19 -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote: On Friday 22 June 2001 04:24, Erik Enge wrote: I'd love to lobby DC to start thinking about this, how do I get in touch with the management team? It would be great if we could discuss this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or similar) and have them

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-dev]ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Simon Michael
Simon Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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 PS, and in case that wasn't clear - I want to say a BIG THANK YOU to all who put so much hard work into solving

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-dev]ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-22 Thread Simon Michael
Now you're talking. Seconded. ___ 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

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Erik Enge
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: You're not allowed to distribute a derived work of GPL code with proprietary code incorporated. Ok, this is the situation. We in Thingamy usually create all our products under the GPL. Then we give the whole shebang to the client we have been

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
i'll try to answer as clearly as possible but remeber that what follows are *my* oppinions, not mixad live's nor debian's. On 21 Jun 2001 10:52:28 +0200, Erik Enge wrote: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: [snip] If I have the proprietory program P (that is the clients

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Erik Enge
On 21 Jun 2001, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: if your product derives from GUM or uses internal interfaces, no, you can't. if your product uses only well the defined external api or access gum through zope, then, imho, yes. Ok, that's good. Then it means we can potentially use GPL Zope Python

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Nils Kassube
* Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2001-06-20 19:12]: As far as I can tell you are wrong, but there are certainly gray areas. The last time this came up I wrote such a scenario up and tried to get FSF clarification. Nothing ever came back. I got a clarification from the FSF. It's in the

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Toby Dickenson
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 16:50:33 +0200 (CEST), Morten W. Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and the 'obnoxious advertising clause' seemingly puts a stop to it.. I understand that 'obnoxious advertising clause' is the phrase used by the FSF to describe this type of license clause, however I wonder

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 11:47:49AM +0100, Toby Dickenson wrote: On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 16:50:33 +0200 (CEST), Morten W. Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and the 'obnoxious advertising clause' seemingly puts a stop to it.. I understand that 'obnoxious advertising clause' is the phrase used

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Erik Enge
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Nils Kassube wrote: * Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2001-06-20 19:12]: As far as I can tell you are wrong, but there are certainly gray areas. The last time this came up I wrote such a scenario up and tried to get FSF clarification. Nothing ever came back. I

RE: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Toby Dickenson
and the 'obnoxious advertising clause' seemingly puts a stop to it.. I understand that 'obnoxious advertising clause' is the phrase used by the FSF to describe this type of license clause, however I wonder whether you (personally, or as an organisation) really find it to be

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 12:50:03PM +0100, Toby Dickenson wrote: Please, don't try to critize the FSF just for the fun of it. I did not intend any fun, nor criticism. Have you read the FSF's comment about the original 'obnoxious advertising clause' ? The problem is a practical one,

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Jim Penny
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 12:28:01PM +0200, Nils Kassube wrote: * Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2001-06-20 19:12]: As far as I can tell you are wrong, but there are certainly gray areas. The last time this came up I wrote such a scenario up and tried to get FSF clarification. Nothing

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 21 Jun 2001 11:08:30 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: [snip] OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system may I install a piece of GPL software on the operating system? May I redistribute the operating system? With the GPL software? May I invoke/run the GPL

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 11:08:30AM -0400, Jim Penny wrote: OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system may I install a piece of GPL software on the operating system? May I redistribute the operating system? With the GPL software? May I invoke/run the GPL

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Jim Penny
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 05:18:40PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 11:08:30 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: [snip] OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system may I install a piece of GPL software on the operating system? May I redistribute the

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 21 Jun 2001 11:39:37 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 05:18:40PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 11:08:30 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: [snip] OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system may I install a piece of GPL

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Jim Penny
err, no. if you write an external module using only python code, as long as you use a gpl-compatible python to run zope, you can call your external code from zope. if you write a product suclassing dc code, you're effectively 'linking' and gpl limitations apply. GPL limitations

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Casey Duncan
Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 11:39:37 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 05:18:40PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 11:08:30 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: [snip] OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:02:34AM -0600, Casey Duncan wrote: To me this is the key point. If you GPL license a product (or other software) for Zope, you cannot subclass ZPL coded classes in your product without violating the GPL. This makes a strict GPL license nearly useless for Zope

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Oliver Bleutgen
as i said before, writing gpl code subclassing zope is a non-sense. even the author cannot, imho, redistribute its work with a plain gpl attached to it. the gpl says that if you link with gpl code *all* the code should be gpl or gpl-compatible (major os components like clibs, compilers, etc

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Bill Anderson
On 21 Jun 2001 17:18:40 +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 11:08:30 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: [snip] OK, consider this from another point of view. If I have an operating system may I install a piece of GPL software on the operating system? May I redistribute the operating

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 21 Jun 2001 12:07:36 -0600, Bill Anderson wrote: [snip] err, no. if you write an external module using only python code, as long as you use a gpl-compatible python to run zope, you can call your No, No, no, NO! The License of PYTHON only applies to modifications, derivations, etc.

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Casey Duncan
Gregor Hoffleit wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:02:34AM -0600, Casey Duncan wrote: To me this is the key point. If you GPL license a product (or other software) for Zope, you cannot subclass ZPL coded classes in your product without violating the GPL. This makes a strict GPL license

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Dieter Maurer
Erik Enge writes: Another question which I feel is very related, and to which I cannot get any real clarification: Can Zope run GPL Zope Python Products without being relicensed as GPL? I think, we can answer this with a clear yes: As an analogy: You can use a Windows (TM) command

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Bill Anderson
On 21 Jun 2001 21:18:16 +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: On 21 Jun 2001 12:07:36 -0600, Bill Anderson wrote: [snip] err, no. if you write an external module using only python code, as long as you use a gpl-compatible python to run zope, you can call your No, No, no, NO! The

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-21 Thread Shane Hathaway
Jim Penny wrote: DC and FSF somehow have to come to some understandings of the following questions. Here is my own view (not DC's offical word!) Can a GPL (unmodified) component be distributed for Zope (at all)? I think the message by Bradley Kuhn is a little misleading. If you are the

[Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Morten W. Petersen
Hi there, we @ thingamy are considering changing our license to a ZPL-ish one [1] to better serve our clients' needs. However, some of the (Zope) products we've developed may need to rely on GPL'ed code, or needs to be incorporated within it, and the 'obnoxious advertising clause' seemingly

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 04:50:33PM +0200, Morten W. Petersen wrote: we @ thingamy are considering changing our license to a ZPL-ish one [1] to better serve our clients' needs. However, some of the (Zope) products we've developed may need to rely on GPL'ed code, or needs to be incorporated

RE: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 20 Jun 2001 10:38:03 -0500, Steve Drees wrote: Here comes the liscence wars again. Still haven't figured out how GPL became the holy grail. the terms on the gpl are (by choice) the strictiest (does that word even exists?) ever seen in a free software license. but a lot of people 'believe'

RE: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Erik Enge
On 20 Jun 2001, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: i am sure that the QPL and the ZPL are completely incompatible but nobody cares because nobody really thinks that one is better than the other... I might be misunderstanding here, if that's the case I appologies. Just to clarify, for us at

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 06:27:08PM +0200, Erik Enge wrote: On 20 Jun 2001, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: i am sure that the QPL and the ZPL are completely incompatible but nobody cares because nobody really thinks that one is better than the other... I might be misunderstanding here, if

RE: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 20 Jun 2001 18:27:08 +0200, Erik Enge wrote: On 20 Jun 2001, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: i am sure that the QPL and the ZPL are completely incompatible but nobody cares because nobody really thinks that one is better than the other... I might be misunderstanding here, if that's the

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Jan-Oliver Wagner
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:38:03AM -0500, Steve Drees wrote: Here comes the liscence wars again. Still haven't figured out how GPL became the holy grail. 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

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
Hmm, I think this discussion doesn't belong to zope-dev. Still, for those interested in that topic: I raised a similar question on the debian-legal mailing list just yesterday (Q: Combining proprietary code and GPL for in-house use). The discussion is still ongoing, and it certainly gives you

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Jim Penny
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 08:05:43PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 01:12:20PM -0400, Jim Penny wrote: It appears to me, that, if you want to play it safe, you would not distribute the code under license G and license T on the same medium. It is certainly acceptable

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Federico Di Gregorio
On 20 Jun 2001 13:12:20 -0400, Jim Penny wrote: Also, as an aside, if this really concerns you, you might wish to consider contacting the author of the GPL product. There is nothing to prevent him from giving you different licensing terms. For most GPL authors, this comes down to a simple

Re: [Zope-dev] ZPL and GPL licensing issues

2001-06-20 Thread Michel Pelletier
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: Hmm, I think this discussion doesn't belong to zope-dev. It's very informitive to me so far. I have no problem with discussing it here. -Michel ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]