Hi Martin. What you advocate would represent a milestone for the PF if any such
inniative could gather traction. The componentization of Zope and Plone only
brings the sharing issue into sharper focus. Overall, there is little need to
duplicate generic recipes, authentication plugins, and other common
componentry. This type of sharing could only increase colaboration and
strengthen the software.
I don't agree with introducing another license into the mix however if this
were considered. The ZPL is the license has generated the success of zope and
is comfortable to zope developers.
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, December 22, 2007 4:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Plone-Users] ZPL and GPL: What should one consider when
choosing a license?
> Tres Seaver wrote:
> > Rehashing GPL vs ZPL is off topic here, because the ZPL is the
> > *mandated* license for any code contributed into the zope.org
> > repository: that choice is not subject to debate.
> And similarly, Plone core (at the very least, the CMFPlone package
> the plone.app.* namespace, but probably some or all other things
> are mandated by the Plone Foundation to be GPL licensed.
> I personally prefer plone.* packages (which are more re-usable) to
> LGPL or ZPL licensed so as to encourage re-use, but AFAIK there's
> been a clear position on this, which is unfortunate.
> Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
> want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> Plone-Users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -