Paolo,
Perhaps I'm getting this out of context, but you have done something *very* difficult to do: you've offended me (on Stef's behalf). Asking Stef to "do something constructive" is like asking asking a shark to swim.
As for GPL in any variant, I have never trusted it, and see no justifiable advantage over something like MIT or BSD. Your (apparent) reaction to Stef is only deepening my preference for simplicity of licensing.
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From:
[hidden email] [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paolo Bonzini
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 11:05 AM
To: GNU Smalltalk; Pharo Development; ESUG Mailing list
Cc: stephane ducasse
Subject: [Pharo-project] Please: less license blahblah, more actual progress on the issue
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 18:53, stephane ducasse <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> Thanks thanks thanks thanks for a refresh on that!
> Thanks!
Stef, instead of thanking five times, why don't you try to do something constructive?
The GPLv3 includes a system of granting Additional Permissions. This system has already been used by GCC and Autoconf. Let's develop a set of additional permissions that we believe do not "taint" the whole image. I placed a starting point at
http://smalltalk.gnu.org/blog/bonzinip/towards-permissive-copyleft-license-dynamic-languages[To those that followed the entire thread: this is totally independent of how any GSoC code related to GNU Smalltalk will be licensed].
Paolo
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Locked
