Cees:
You appear to have misunderstood what <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said. He expressed hope that Squeak could be GPL-compatible, not that it would be GPL-like! Perhaps my license_quick_ref.html [1] would be helpful to illustrate how the two features are orthogonal. ("GPL-compatible" is the column with the legend "combine with GPL'ed code and redistribute". "GPL-like" is logical NOT of the column entitled "combine with proprietary and redistribute".) I am a big fan of open source dynamic object oriented languages like Python and E [2] and I've heard many great things about Squeak. Let me add my voice to lichengtai's that I hope Squeak will be GPL-compatible. Regards, Zooko [1] http://zooko.com/license_quick_ref.html [2] http://erights.org/ --- zooko.com Security and Distributed Systems Engineering --- you wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > Hope you can make the Squeak license GNU GPL compatible. That will > > make Squeak useful to a lot of people. > > I'll have to disappoint you there, but we are not planning to move towards the > GPL. The GPL has problems for an environment like Squeak, which has all the > power of a complete operating system but is typically distributed (to end > users) as two files: the VM and the object memory image. Under the GPL, no > matter what you'd do, distributing in this form would constitute linking and > that would mean that commercial code would never be possible with Squeak; > something that we expressly do want to make possible (not in the latest place, > because it is happening and these companies are making great contributions to > the Commons, as it should be). -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3