Re: [Zope] And now for a good laugh (Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill)

2000-09-14 Thread Lalo Martins
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 10:23:21AM +0200, Nils Kassube wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lalo Martins) wrote: Renderable wasn't even GPL'ed to begin with. And this isn't a mistake; now that I think if it, I clearly remember having chosen the ZPL so that DC folks could easily take the changes

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Erik Enge
[Karl Anderson] | In order to link/incorporate a GPL'd module, you have to be able to | distribute the entire work under the GPL. : | Therefore, assuming RMS is correct, GPL'd components can't be | distributed as part of a Zope solution. : | Is this correct? If it is, the GPL isn't very

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Jerome Alet
On 13 Sep 2000, Erik Enge wrote: And if it really is Products (as in lib/python/Products), does this mean that if I make a GNU GPL licensed application for a client, I can't actually distribute Zope with it? I have to install them separately? Maybe this is stupid, but I'm sure it would

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Terry Kerr
Well put! terry Jerome Alet wrote: On 13 Sep 2000, Erik Enge wrote: And if it really is Products (as in lib/python/Products), does this mean that if I make a GNU GPL licensed application for a client, I can't actually distribute Zope with it? I have to install them separately?

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Toby Dickenson
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:53:34 -0700, Kapil Thangavelu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to give my code to the community. i don't want people taking my code from the community and distributing it without giving back. If that is your motivation then you may find that you get *more* back by not

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Dario Lopez-Kästen
From: "Toby Dickenson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] If that is your motivation then you may find that you get *more* back by not using the GPL. My contributions to Zope (both personal and on company time) are fairly significant in total, and would not have happened if Zope was under a GPL license.

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Nils Kassube
Dario Lopez-K”sten wrote: and then, when you want to distribute your modifications, you find yourself in a bad position, because it will mean that you would have to give everybody else the same rights that allowed you to distribute a modification of someone elses work, in the first place?

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Nils Kassube
Jim Hebert wrote: Look, I'm the last person on earth to say the GPL is perfect, or is the one true license, or anything else. I've heard a number of GOOD arguments in a number of venues about why the GPL may not be the best choice in that setting. From:

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Andrew Kenneth Milton
+---[ Dario Lopez-Kästen ]-- | | From: "Toby Dickenson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] | If that is your motivation then you may find that you get *more* back | by not using the GPL. My contributions to Zope (both personal and on | company time) are fairly significant in total, and

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Jerome Alet
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote: The second reason is that GPL attracts fanatics. Just look at any discussion forums where the issue comes up. You cannot have a calm discussion and mention the GPL. Sorry, but until I've received your previous message, and the one about

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Toby Dickenson
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:33:05 +0200, "Dario Lopez-Kästen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "Toby Dickenson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] If that is your motivation then you may find that you get *more* back by not using the GPL. My contributions to Zope (both personal and on company time) are fairly

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Jim Hebert
Hey, Nils, I've got news for you. I've written 3 separate posts now which were long and thoughtful, which quoted from the GPL, and which explained to you and the rest of the community how you could deliver a proprietary solution to a client which relied on a GPL'd object in zope. But, I've

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Jim Hebert
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: To quote Dave Winer: "[The GPL is] designed to create a wall between commercial development and free development. The world is not that simple. There are plenty of commercial developers who participate in open source. Python belongs in commercial

[Zope] OT: Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Bill Anderson
Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote: +---[ Dario Lopez-Kästen ]-- | | From: "Toby Dickenson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] | If that is your motivation then you may find that you get *more* back | by not using the GPL. My contributions to Zope (both personal and on | company time)

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Nils Kassube
Jim Hebert wrote: Third, again, you're responding as though the discussion is about re-licensing all of Zope under the, which simply isn't what anyone has I'm only pointing out what I think is a problem with using a GPL'ed component in a Zope site. My Zope-specific problem is: If I use a

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Jim Hebert
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: I'm only pointing out what I think is a problem with using a GPL'ed component in a Zope site. My Zope-specific problem is: If I use a GPL'ed component in a complex object oriented environment like Zope, does this mean that the whole work is now

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread jpenny
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:29:23PM +0200, Nils Kassube wrote: I'm only pointing out what I think is a problem with using a GPL'ed component in a Zope site. My Zope-specific problem is: If I use a GPL'ed component in a complex object oriented environment like Zope, does this mean that the

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-13 Thread Andrew Kenneth Milton
+---[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- | On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:29:23PM +0200, Nils Kassube wrote: | I'm only pointing out what I think is a problem with using a | GPL'ed component in a Zope site. | | My Zope-specific problem is: If I use a GPL'ed component in a complex |

[Zope] And now for a good laugh (Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill)

2000-09-13 Thread Lalo Martins
I replied to the message below promising to edit Renderable's README to explicitly declare that I don't consider ZClass subclassing to be a derivative work for the purposes of the GPL. Somehow, I didn't get my reply from the list. But never mind. I went to my folder on Zope.org to edit the

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Chris Withers
Nils Kassube wrote: I hope Zope product developers think twice about using the GPL. The GPL license is not about sharing like e.g. the BSD license, it's about enforcing the political agenda of people who think that commercial ("proprietary") software w/o source code is evil. This is very

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Oleg Broytmann
Hi! On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: Oleg Broytmann wrote: LICENSE GPL I've seen several Zope products using the GPL. In my not so humble opinion, this could develop into a serious problem for Zope deployment. I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but the use of

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Oleg Broytmann
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oleg Broytmann) wrote: No, you are not forced to publish anything. GPL "virus" applied only if you want to *distribute* combined (your code + my GPL'd code). Like in "distributing to clients"? So that I have to publish

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Danny William Adair
PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oleg Broytmann) wrote: No, you are not forced to publish anything. GPL "virus" applied only if you want to *distribute* combined (your code + my GPL'd code). L

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Oleg Broytmann
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Danny William Adair wrote: Now Nils and Oleg are giving me the creeps. Is it not possible to take a few GPLed Zope products, add your own effort of configuring, integrating, building, (re-)designing, and even documenting the outcome of your efforts and - ___sell___ this?

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Nils Kassube
Danny William Adair wrote: Is it not possible to take a few GPLed Zope products, add your own effort of configuring, integrating, building, (re-)designing, and even documenting the outcome of your efforts and - ___sell___ this? Maybe not only to _one_ customer, but burn a CD and sell it to

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Magnus Alvestad
[Danny William Adair] | Now Nils and Oleg are giving me the creeps. There are several issues here. First, it is not obvious that including one GPL'ed product in a zope site and then distributing that site obliges you to distribute any further source code. Only if you (embrace and) extend that

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Nils Kassube
Magnus Alvestad wrote: Third, you are only obligated to distribute source to parties you have already distributed the binary version to. I can't really see a customer buying a zope site from you and not expecting 'source' anyway. The problem is not that a client who paid for custom

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Tim Cook
Danny William Adair wrote: Hi all! Now Nils and Oleg are giving me the creeps. Is it not possible to take a few GPLed Zope products, add your own effort of configuring, integrating, building, (re-)designing, and even documenting the outcome of your efforts and - ___sell___ this? Maybe

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Bill Anderson
Nils Kassube wrote: Oleg Broytmann wrote: LICENSE GPL I've seen several Zope products using the GPL. In my not so humble opinion, this could develop into a serious problem for Zope deployment. I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but the use of GPL'ed source code like

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Lalo Martins
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 06:02:15PM +0200, Nils Kassube wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oleg Broytmann) wrote: No, you are not forced to publish anything. GPL "virus" applied only if you want to *distribute* combined (your code + my GPL'd code). Like in "distributing to clients"? So that I

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Jim Hebert
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Nils Kassube wrote: The problem is not that a client who paid for custom development will get the source. It's the fact that you have to release the source code of an enhanced GPL'ed component (and possibly stuff built with it) for everyone else, too. *gasp* Your

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Magnus Alvestad
Just to state my position, I have worked as a professional commercial software developer since 1994. I think the GPL is appropriate for work I do outside customer contracts. [Nils Kassube] | The problem is not that a client who paid for custom development | will get the source. It's the fact

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Dario Lopez-Kästen
- Original Message - From: "Nils Kassube" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Magnus Alvestad" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 8:57 PM Subject: Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill Magnus Alvestad wrote: Third, you are only obligated

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread A.J. Rossini
"TC" == Tim Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: TC Danny William Adair wrote: Hi all! Now Nils and Oleg are giving me the creeps. Is it not possible to take a few GPLed Zope products, add your own effort of configuring, integrating, building, (re-)designing, and even

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Hannu Krosing
Magnus Alvestad wrote: [Danny William Adair] | Now Nils and Oleg are giving me the creeps. There are several issues here. First, it is not obvious that including one GPL'ed product in a zope site and then distributing that site obliges you to distribute any further source code.

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Karl Anderson
Correct me if I'm wrong (and don't bother with the discussion on the merits or non- of the GPL, I don't care in this context), but: In order to link/incorporate a GPL'd module, you have to be able to distribute the entire work under the GPL. RMS says that the ZPL isn't compatible with the GPL;

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Kapil Thangavelu
Karl Anderson wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong (and don't bother with the discussion on the merits or non- of the GPL, I don't care in this context), but: In order to link/incorporate a GPL'd module, you have to be able to distribute the entire work under the GPL. RMS says that the ZPL

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Terry Kerr
Hi, I think the direction of this discussion has been lost. The main concern is with the distribution of GPL'd zope products as a part of other products, commercial, proprietary, freeware, or not. In this case, does the GPL enforce that the product as a whole must be distributed under the GPL?

Re: [Zope] Zope and the GPL poison pill

2000-09-12 Thread Andrew Kenneth Milton
I love the smell of napalm in the morning. -- Totally Holistic Enterprises Internet| P:+61 7 3870 0066 | Andrew Milton The Internet (Aust) Pty Ltd | F:+61 7 3870 4477 | ACN: 082 081 472 ABN: 83 082 081 472 | M:+61 416 022 411 | Carpe Daemon PO Box 837 Indooroopilly QLD 4068