On Apr 21, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:

Hash: SHA1

Benji York wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:45 AM, Baiju M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It looks like today they changed their licence to GPL v3 !

I don't know if that exclamation mark is of joy or woe. I vote for woe.

I don't know if woe is necessarily fight:  given that we are talking
about a component which is served separately from any of our Python
code, without even the (debatable) trigger of a Python import to cause
our code to be a "derived work", the "mere aggregation" clause is likell to apply to distributing ExtJS with a ZPLed Python library / application.

We're not just talking about Python code. We're also talking about Javascript code. We'll be providing JS code that runs in the browser with and depends on the Ext code. My library did and Paul's changes did.

Reading the GPL3, The language is very broad. It talks about works "based on" GPL works being GPL. In: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation , the FAQ talks about programs communicating via interprocess communication. In particular: "But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program." It would be easy, IMO, and useful for a Python framework to generate data structures that are meant to be consumed by Ext. For example, my from framework returns Ext field definitions as JSON.

Having an unambiguous FOSS license on the code has to be good news for
those who would like to build and distribute such components.

I don't find anything about the GPL to be unambiguous unless I read it with the broadest, most paranoid interpretation.

for instance, is a ZPLed component which depends on the non-ZPL MySQL
client libraries, which doesn't seem to cause problems.

Good point.

I think we were sloppy here and it probably does cause problems. I think we probably should remove this from the repository.

We *still* can't put the ExtJS code itself into svn.zope.org, but
perhaps we can now allow checking in ZPLed code which uses it.

No, we can't. I am willing to be overridden by the Foundation Board on this. Absent that, consider this an edict. :)


Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to