Zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >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! > I probably expressed myself bad and was thinking about lots of other things that distracted me.
As far as basic GPL compatibility goes as in "combine with GPL'ed code and redistribute", I don't see any problems with the current Squeak License. However, I see problems in accepting GPL'ed code in the base distribution because of the viral effects - that was what I was thinking of. Personally, I like the political/philosophical ideas behind the GPL (I'm more a free software than an open source advocate), but when I studied it some 7 years ago in relation to Java, I felt that the whole issue around linking was not really applicable to modern environments. Squeak goes a bit further than that, smashing everything together in a single file, and is even more problematic with the GPL because it is at the moment not possible to separate GPL components out so that they don't 'infect' the rest of the memory image. -- Cees de Groot http://www.cdegroot.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD 1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
