On Dec 21, 2007, at 3:53 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
Unfortunately, the comment by Chris McDonough mentioned in the latter
doesn't seem to be accessible any more. I'd love to read it.
I don't think Plone is "bad" because it uses the GPL. I do think it's
a pain in the balls to have to ask authors of various GPL things if
they're willing to relicense ZPL or other BSD-type license in order to
be able to incorporate their software into CMF or Zope (as required by
the ZC contributor's agreement in order to check it into either of
those projects). It just puts up a big enough impediment to sharing
code that the codebases don't intermingle much.
What's gauche about using the GPL is that at least by default, the
Plone guys don't need to ask the Zope guys if they can ship their
software. They get the benefit (or pain ;-) of shipping it all without
any extra work. But the Zope guys need to go track down the copyright
owners of various bits of Plone code and get all of their permissions
to ship their software in CMF or Zope via a relicense. That's just
hurts collaboration badly. It's anti-sharing which I think is
practically just gauche.
Now I've gotta run out of here before a licensing discussion breaks
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -