On Jul 6, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 22:17 -0700, Weldon Washburn wrote:
Also, the following mail archive says that Apache has issues with
CPL code:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/
200503.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does MMTK exist under any other license?
That seems to be similar to how we (FSF/GNU) look at the CPL. It is a
free software license. But since it is incompatible with the GPL (has
different requirements on distribution) we are happy to use it for
standalone use in applications, but we won't use such code bases for
creating larger derivative works.
Yeah. Ideally bits and pieces, as they are contributed to Harmony
would
be licensed under the Apache license or even more liberal licenses,
Allright. I'll bite. What's more liberal? I consider that the AL
is the most liberal of the commonly found languages as it gives the
users full freedom to do as they choose not only with the licensed
software, but with any derivative works or additional innovation they
may combine with it...
if the answer starts with a "G", please just email me off-list :)
and
the work on fixing the license incompatibility between Apache license
(2) and GPL (2) would result in the legal harmonization allowing the
reuse of bits and chunks of Harmony in GPLd projects as well.
Yep!
geir
cheers,
dalibor topic
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
