Hi John, > -- What were the reasons for Fedora moving from ECL to Apache? Was > it simply that the Apache license is better-known, or were there > specific compatibility or patent issues, or something else?
The main reason we switched to the Apache Software License some time ago was better familiarity in the larger open source community. There were no compatibility or patent issues that played into that decision; it was really just a matter of using terms that a wide group of people are already familiar/comfortable with. > -- Are there problems with releasing software for the Fedora community > under ECL? From a straight compatibility perspective, I don't think so: As you point out, the difference between ASL2 and ECL2 boils down to the patent license grant. But the patent license grant in either case only applies to the original Work; not derivatives. So if you're deciding between Apache and ECL, compatibility with Fedora's license shouldn't be a concern. I think the main tradeoff to make is for your own software; whether it's more important to (a) have a mainstream/familiar license or (b) to get the extra protections/restrictions afforded by the ECL. > -- Are there compatibility or transition problems between ECL and Apache > in the Fedora context that we should be aware of? Because they're so similar, we didn't run into any compatiblity/transition problems when moving from ECL to Apache. Regards, Chris On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:39 PM, John Mark Ockerbloom <[email protected]> wrote: > We're developing software to work with various packages we're using or > considering in our library, including Fedora, Sakai, and other Kuali > projects. Sakai and Kuali software uses the Educational Community > License (ECL), as did Fedora 2. I see that Fedora 3 has moved to the > Apache license. The ECL appears to be the same as the Apache license, > but with slightly more limited patent grants; and it doesn't appear > to be used as often. > > As we consider releasing some of our software as open source (and looking > to get university approval for this), we have some questions on the two > licenses. > > -- What were the reasons for Fedora moving from ECL to Apache? Was > it simply that the Apache license is better-known, or were there > specific compatibility or patent issues, or something else? > > -- Are there problems with releasing software for the Fedora community > under ECL? > > (I'm presuming anything meant to be included in the Fedora repository > software release itself would need to use Apache, since that's the > agreed-on license for that software. But are there any problems > or issues with using ECL for other community-developed software meant > to be used in conjunction with Fedora, such as something that might > go in the Community Software Registry?) > > -- Are there compatibility or transition problems between ECL and Apache > in the Fedora context that we should be aware of? > > Thanks for any answer or pointers you might give. > > John Mark Ockerbloom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf _______________________________________________ Fedora-commons-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-developers
