Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 16. August 2006 15:42:41 +0200 Martijn Faassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Anyway, nothing is said about dependency on GPL-ed code. That's a
different debate. It's strictly not against rules, but it does mean one
expectation is broken: one might want to expect that all code in the
repository is freely usable without having to worry about GPL-provisions.
This is not the case for code that depends on GPL-ed code. Even though
this may be already a grey area for other reasons, it still makes sense
to think about the intent and people's expectations when checking in a
codebase.
I don't see any grey area.
It's a grey area in the area of intent, not in the area of the currently
operative rules (the rules of the ZF intellectual property agreement are
different - see my other post).
The purpose of cvs|svn.zope.org is to be a repos
for ZPLed software and the contributor agreement makes this purpose
clear. But it was never the task of the repos to enforce a particular
license - the ZPL - when building software with/on-top parts taken from
svn|cvs.zope.org. It is up to the individual developers to take the
software and use it under the terms of the ZPL.
Is that the intent of the provisions in the current contributor's
agreement? We should ask the drafters of this agreement for more
details. I can interpret the intent as follows (I don't know whether I'm
right):
* The idea is that one should be able to freely make use any software in
the repository in proprietary codebases when desired, without having
to worry about a GPL license provision affecting the whole.
* The code in the repository can freely use *each other* without
worrying about GPL licensing provisions for the whole.
If those were the intent (not the rules!), then is checking in code with
a GPL dependency against this intent? I can give two possible answers:
* Yes, as you can't freely use that code without using this dependency
which would pull in the GPL license affecting the whole.
* No, as the code is ZPL and the dependency is not part of the
repository. People who use the component better check the provisions of
any dependencies *outside* the repository, and having to do so still
means you can freely use the code in the repository without worrying
about the GPL license affecting the whole.
It's at least worthwhile to figure out together which answers apply to
us as zope developers, now under the ZC contributor's agreement as well
as later, under the ZF contributor's agreement and intellectual property
policy.
And yes, this is talking about intentions and not rules. We as a
community should figure out what we intend first and then, if necessary
and possible, adjust the rules accordingly.
Regards,
Martijn
_______________________________________________
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
