On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 04:45:16PM -0500, Justin Wells wrote:
> > However, please note that even if the APL is changed to be compatible with
> > the GPL, the Semiotek Public License will remain incompatible with the GPL.
>
> That's true. There is no license that is acceptable to the ASF that is
> compatible with the GPL. That's why I had to dual license. I was trying
> to craft such a license but the ASF shot that effort down.
Modified BSD and licenses which are very similar are acceptable to both
the FSF and the ASF! I've said this a number of times now.
I'm *not* saying you should use the modified BSD license; we don't,
because of the fact that we like the additional protections which the
ASL provides.
In an ideal world, we'd love to make the ASL compatible with the GPL --
that's part of why the we changed from the ASL 1.0 to the ASL 1.1 (which
fixed one of the clauses which had been a big issue for RMS).
We has been discussing this recently with the FSF (though I'm not
directly involved and I don't know the current status). The main issue
at this point is that we do like the fact that our license prevents
third parties from using the word "Apache" in the name of software based
on it. This is (AFAIK) the reason RMS says that the ASL is incompatible
with the GPL -- he says that restriction violates a portion of section 6
of the GPL, in that it imposses additional restrictions.
If there's some way to resolve this, though, we'll try to do so.
cheers --
Ed
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
