You completely missed the point. Of *course* I can't use GPLed code if I'm 
going to contribute to the core... but I don't even have the *option* of 
distributing a TWClassic setup incorporating GPLed code in TWClassic 
because all my setups depend on certain CC-BY-SA TiddlyTools plugins and I 
could never justify the time and effort to write clean-room clones of them.

I want to stay GPL-compatible so I keep my options for *plugins* open 
should I need to use some GPLed thing that's just too much trouble to 
reinvent from scratch. (For example, suppose I wanted to write a plugin 
based on speak.js. eSpeak is GPL 3+ and I'm *definitely* not going to write 
my own text-to-speech engine.)

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:34:10 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>
> First, I don't want to have a GPL-like license. I want to remain 
> *compatible* with GPL-licensed code should I choose to use some in the 
> future.
>
> Second, CC-BY-SA is NOT BSD-like. *CC-BY* is BSD-like. The "SA" 
> (ShareAlike) in CC-BY-SA basically means "like the GPL but without any 
> concept of 'source code' and with a mutually-incompatible copyleft clause." 
> (It's intended to be a "GPL for non-code creations" license.)
>
> I want to use the same license as the community standard for whatever I'm 
> building on (eg. BSD for TiddlyWiki, Python license for any libraries I 
> hope might some day become ubiquitous in the Python community, etc.) but, 
> when I have to read/link against code that's under a more restrictive 
> license, I have a strict policy that whatever I get forced into must not 
> prevent me from linking against other people's GPL-licensed stuff further 
> down the road.
>
> On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:14:21 PM UTC-4, PMario wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:51:51 AM UTC+2, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>> The only problem I've ever had with TWClassic was that, without 
>>> TiddlyTools plugins, it felt crippled and, since everyone's docs and 
>>> plugins were in Google-resistant TWClassic instances, finding docs and 
>>> examples needed to reinvent TiddlyTools stuff under a more GPL-compatible 
>>> license was prohibitively difficult.
>>>
>>> (Sort of similar to the "Open Core" licensing schemes various vendors 
>>> try because they want to have their cake and eat it too.)
>>>
>>
>> Why do you want to have a GPL like license? GPL is much more restrictive 
>> than BSD or CC-BY-SA. CC-BY-SA is very similar to BSD. Both have close to 
>> no restrictions. 
>>
>> -m
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to