[ I am not on the P5EE list. Sadly, circumstances have forced me to stay out of the loop of the Perl community for the past eight months or so.
I am chiming in only because Adam Cc'ed me, presumably for my input. ] Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The other issue that needs to be resolved is the viral nature of the > GPL, and whether code built using P5EE is infected with the GPL. That's > a separate can of worms, and probably not worth discussing in depth (yet > again) at the moment. 'Specially if the dual license is reused here. > :-) I am hoping that Larry will make a decision soon about his licensing decisions for Perl 6. Until he does, I encourage people to continue to use the "same license as Perl 5" (i.e., the dual Artistic|GPL license) of all Perl libraries and infrastructure. While I am not wearing my FSF Vice President hat at the moment, I can note that http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html states this as official FSF policy. In short, Ilya Martynov is right---no one from the FSF is going to complain if the software isn't pure GPL. I think using the dual license scheme (GPL|Artistic) that Larry invented is a great way to simply stop licensing arguments before they start. I look forward to an even better option in the same vein once Larry makes a decision about licensing for Perl6. -- bkuhn
msg00497/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
