> I always thought the point of the MIT was that it can be used with > anything, it is definitely compatible with GPL (so the dual license > for Drupal integration doesn't make sense to me) - the only > requirement is to keep the license intact (so the author gets credit). > I've seen downloads with different parts under different licenses, but > does source code distribution imply that *all* the code is under the > same license, regardless of the folder? > > I think WYMeditor looks promising, but I think they would benefit from > more developers (two really isn't enough) and it does look and behave > different to already existing solutions. >
I've actually raised a issue on Drupal (http://drupal.org/node/97948) in regards to integrating this for version 6 of Drupal. That's one thing that Drupal is lacking is a content editor, and maybe if both projects looked at working together on integrating, or at least making WYMeditor fully compatable with Drupal - then that might speed things up. Other benefits from this is making things more lightweight, since TinyMCE and FCK need their own JS libraries loaded in and I haven't seen any other CMS's go down this route with their content editors. Tane _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
