Andreas Jung wrote:

--On 16. August 2006 15:42:41 +0200 Martijn Faassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, nothing is said about dependency on GPL-ed code. That's a
different debate. It's strictly not against rules, but it does mean one
expectation is broken: one might want to expect that all code in the
repository is freely usable without having to worry about GPL-provisions.
This is not the case for code that depends on GPL-ed code. Even though
this may be already a grey area for other reasons, it still makes sense
to think about the intent and people's expectations when checking in a

I don't see any grey area.

It's a grey area in the area of intent, not in the area of the currently operative rules (the rules of the ZF intellectual property agreement are different - see my other post).

The purpose of cvs| is to be a repos
for ZPLed software and the contributor agreement makes this purpose clear. But it was never the task of the repos to enforce a particular license - the ZPL - when building software with/on-top parts taken from svn| It is up to the individual developers to take the software and use it under the terms of the ZPL.

Is that the intent of the provisions in the current contributor's agreement? We should ask the drafters of this agreement for more details. I can interpret the intent as follows (I don't know whether I'm right):

* The idea is that one should be able to freely make use any software in
  the repository in proprietary codebases when desired, without having
  to worry about a GPL license provision affecting the whole.

* The code in the repository can freely use *each other* without
  worrying about GPL licensing provisions for the whole.

If those were the intent (not the rules!), then is checking in code with a GPL dependency against this intent? I can give two possible answers:

* Yes, as you can't freely use that code without using this dependency which would pull in the GPL license affecting the whole.

* No, as the code is ZPL and the dependency is not part of the repository. People who use the component better check the provisions of any dependencies *outside* the repository, and having to do so still means you can freely use the code in the repository without worrying about the GPL license affecting the whole.

It's at least worthwhile to figure out together which answers apply to us as zope developers, now under the ZC contributor's agreement as well as later, under the ZF contributor's agreement and intellectual property policy.

And yes, this is talking about intentions and not rules. We as a community should figure out what we intend first and then, if necessary and possible, adjust the rules accordingly.


Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to