On Dec 16, 2:09 am, "Branko Vukelic" <branko.vuke...@gmx.com> wrote: > > Yes, I agree, but all I said was that the concerns are not invalid (I > > also pointed out an issue that has not thus far been addressed -- > > standalone DAL). I think we can decide to stick with GPL while still > > recognizing it may present a barrier for some (possibly simply due to > > confusion or risk aversion rather than a real legal threat). This > > issue is both complex and important, so a long discussion should not > > be surprising. I, for one, have learned a lot, and assuming we follow > > through, I believe the result of this long thread will be an > > improvement in the license and therefore the comfort of prospective > > users. Those uninterested in the topic can easily ignore the thread. > > You are missing the main point here, and that's software freedom and two > incompatible views regarding that. It's not by conincidence that there is a > commercial EXCEPTION to GPL in web2py. The reason it's called an exception is > that it is incompatible with the intent of GPL. Now consider that Massimo has > _chosen_ GPL with an intent, and that GPL aligns with that intent. Do I need > to go on?
I don't _think_ I'm missing the main point, as I agree with what you state above. Anthony
