In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jimmie Houchin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GPL would protect DC from predatory competitors. It would also allow
for Zope's adoption in certain environments. I also believe some people
And prevent it in others.
would relicense their products to the
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:48:20 +0100 (MET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juan
David Ibáñez Palomar) wrote:
it's illegal to distribute GPL code together
with [ZPL] code
I dont see this as an issue for Zope (taken as a whole). There is no
problem with other developers releasing GPL products for
Simon Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or, if someone wants to distribute something which includes zope and
one or more GPL products.
I mean, eg, you want to distribute your end-user package Easy Portal
Creator 2000, based on zope/ptk/squishdot/zwiki.
Some quick points on this.
First, feel free to talk on this list about ways that Zope
developers can license their stuff. It's a constructive
discussion, and since I'm not a Zope developer, I can ignore
it. :^)
Second, regarding the licensing of Zope itself, ChrisP is
right that I'm the guy
I personally do not have a problem with the Zope license. However, I do
use a lot of GPLed software and appreciate it. I also am appreciative of
the ability to use Zope and to take advantage of the wonderful work that
DC has produced. When the original debate occurred I was in support of
DC
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jimmie Houchin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GPL would protect DC from predatory competitors. It would also allow
for Zope's adoption in certain environments. I also believe some people
And prevent it in others.
would relicense their products to the GPL if it
Juan David IbXXez Palomar wrote:
software, but I know there's people that don't use Zope because of this
incompatibility.
their loss...
Chris
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross
Juan David IbXXez Palomar wrote:
And more, there's already zope software with the GPL license, for
example ZWiki. ZWiki is included in Debian, probably the Debian
developer that maintains the package is not aware of these license
issues.
Has any open source license issue actually come to
Has any open source license issue actually come to court yet?
How many people really care about this compared to the number of people
who just want to get on, develop and use software in an open source
community fashion and don't want to get involved in religious flame
wars?
My $0.02
this is not about religion and a flame war is the last thing I want
I only wanted to let you know about these facts, and yes there're
projects that have been hurt by "license issues", for example KDE.
Regaurding licensing, twhile I wouldn't want to snuff out freedom of speech,
I would say
Regaurding licensing, twhile I wouldn't want to snuff out freedom of speech,
I would say that we have already had the "Licensing Wars" about 18 months
ago, and things are settled and non negotiable at this point. Arguing only
creates tension in the community, which does more damage
Juan, thanks for shining some light towards this murky area. Maybe
ZWiki and other zope products need to be LGPL or dual-licensed, maybe
the zope license can use some refinement. I for one won't know without
seeing some enlightened discussion of the issue.
This stuff is unsexy but important.
On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Juan David Ibáñez Palomar wrote:
has come to my ears that there's people who doesn't use Zope because
its license is GPL-incompatible, more info here:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
They say it's an
13 matches
Mail list logo