Licensing Questions

I hope I got this straight, but I'm probably confused. What I want to
know is what is the proposed license for the current and new images.
Here's what I think is true, please tell me where I am wrong:

* All Squeak images (except version 1.1) are subject to the Apple
Computer, Inc. Software License shown at:
http://www.squeak.org/SqueakLicense/

* Squeak 1.1 has moved to the APSL - the Apple Public Source License
(http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/2.0.txt)

* The community/SqF Board is gathering authors to be part of a new
licensing scheme for the current(?) and newer(?) Squeak images. That
license is the MIT license. I gather that this text is correct for the
MIT license:

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php

Is this all true? I have some follow on questions after this is confirmed.

Is there a person that is "in charge of" or coordinating the licensing
issue?


--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com
+1 (408) 799-6124

Brad Fuller wrote:
> * All Squeak images (except version 1.1) are subject to the Apple
> Computer, Inc. Software License shown at:
> http://www.squeak.org/SqueakLicense/

All Squeak images *including* version 1.1 are available under Squeak-L.

> * Squeak 1.1 has moved to the APSL - the Apple Public Source License
> (http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/2.0.txt)

*In addition* to being available under Squeak-L, Squeak 1.1 has also
been relicensed by Apple under *both* APSL 2.0 *as well as* Apache 2.0.
Viewpoints Research negotiated both agreements.

> * The community/SqF Board is gathering authors to be part of a new
> licensing scheme for the current(?) and newer(?) Squeak images. That
> license is the MIT license. I gather that this text is correct for the
> MIT license:
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
>
> Is this all true? I have some follow on questions after this is confirmed.

With the above corrections, yes.

> Is there a person that is "in charge of" or coordinating the licensing
> issue?

Kim Rose (VPRI) and Craig Latta (SqF) are coordinating this effort.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

Andreas Raab wrote: Just to be clear here, Andreas. New images are to be under the MIT license?



--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com
+1 (408) 799-6124

Brad Fuller wrote:
I believe that to be the case but since I'm not on the SqF board (and
not following Squeak-dev closely these days) I might be wrong.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

Hi Brad--

> New images are to be under the MIT license?

     Yes.


-C

--
Craig Latta
http://netjam.org/resume