beware GNU Smalltalk if you want to contribute to squeak

Basically, keep in mind that GNU Smalltalk is GPL, and therefore,
incompatible with Squeak's license.  Oops.  Don't look inside.  Keep
a safe "clean-room" distance from any code in GST.

Also posted on
<http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/library/post/beware-gnu-smalltalk-if-you-work-on-squeak.html>.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

If GPL does not prevent users from using Seaside in GST, then
using Seaside in GST - if ported - can be meaningful. In fact
I'm very curious on the Seaside performance(of my application)
in GST(with JIT).

Importing GST's code to Seaside will be problematic because
it can cause License conflict problem. But I'm not sure on every
part/usage of GST is GPL; it might be similar case of GLibC...

----- Original Message -----
   From: "Randal L. Schwartz" <[hidden email]>
   To: [hidden email]
   Sent: 08-01-09 07:34:07
   Subject: beware GNU Smalltalk if you want to contribute to squeak

 
Basically, keep in mind that GNU Smalltalk is GPL, and therefore,
incompatible with Squeak's license.  Oops.  Don't look inside.  Keep
a safe "clean-room" distance from any code in GST.

Also posted on
<http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/library/post/beware-gnu-smalltalk-if-you-work-on-squeak.html>.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

If GPL does not prevent users from using Seaside in GST, then
using Seaside in GST - if ported - can be meaningful. In fact
I'm very curious on the Seaside performance(of my application)
in GST(with JIT).

Importing GST's code to Seaside will be problematic because
it can cause License conflict problem. But I'm not sure on every
part/usage of GST is GPL; it might be similar case of GLibC...

----- Original Message -----
   From: "Randal L. Schwartz" <[hidden email]>
   To: [hidden email]
   Sent: 08-01-09 07:34:07
   Subject: beware GNU Smalltalk if you want to contribute to squeak

 
Basically, keep in mind that GNU Smalltalk is GPL, and therefore,
incompatible with Squeak's license.  Oops.  Don't look inside.  Keep
a safe "clean-room" distance from any code in GST.

Also posted on
<http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/library/post/beware-gnu-smalltalk-if-you-work-on-squeak.html>.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Sorry but the subject of this mail sounds like FUD to me.

The Smalltalk community is really small, and Pablo Bonzini (the  
maintainer of GST) is also very active on this list.
If I want to port something from GST to Squeak is very simple: I talk  
to Pablo and the community of GST (which is usually is part of the  
Squeak community too) and create a package with LGPL license (or LGPL/
MIT or whatever)... so I can use it both in Squeak and GST, no big  
deal. (in SqueakMap there is a lot of packages with LGPL license).

We are people that can talk each other, not robots driven by license  
rules.

Regards
Diego

On Jan 8, 2008, at 7:34 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

If you can get parts of it relicensed, sure. My warning applies only  
to the items *as licensed* which are incompatible licensed with the  
squeak distro. I'm just trying to avoid introducing any more problems  
for squeak.

Sent from my iPhone!

On Jan 8, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Diego Fernández <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>>>> "chunsj" == chunsj  <[hidden email]> writes:

chunsj> Importing GST's code to Seaside will be problematic because
chunsj> it can cause License conflict problem. But I'm not sure on every
chunsj> part/usage of GST is GPL; it might be similar case of GLibC...

The license I see at
<http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/smalltalk/main.c?revision=1.6&root=smalltalk&view=markup>
looks pretty clear:

 * This file is part of GNU Smalltalk.
 *
 * GNU Smalltalk is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
 * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free
 * Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later
 * version.
 *
 * Linking GNU Smalltalk statically or dynamically with other modules is
 * making a combined work based on GNU Smalltalk.  Thus, the terms and
 * conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole
 * combination.
 *
 * In addition, as a special exception, the Free Software Foundation
 * give you permission to combine GNU Smalltalk with free software
 * programs or libraries that are released under the GNU LGPL and with
 * independent programs running under the GNU Smalltalk virtual machine.
 *
 * You may copy and distribute such a system following the terms of the
 * GNU GPL for GNU Smalltalk and the licenses of the other code
 * concerned, provided that you include the source code of that other
 * code when and as the GNU GPL requires distribution of source code.
 *
 * Note that people who make modified versions of GNU Smalltalk are not
 * obligated to grant this special exception for their modified
 * versions; it is their choice whether to do so.  The GNU General
 * Public License gives permission to release a modified version without
 * this exception; this exception also makes it possible to release a
 * modified version which carries forward this exception.

Doesn't look like I can just lift part of the libs from GST and use it as-is
in something that is not as restrictive as the LGPL.  Which means I *cannot*
use it as-is in a Squeak distro.  It has to be relicensed under a more-free
license, like MIT or Apache2.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

>>>>> "Diego" == Diego Fernández <[hidden email]> writes:

Diego> We are people that can talk each other, not robots driven by license
Diego> rules.

It would be nice then for the GST folks to give a blanket Squeak-compatible
license (like MIT or Apache2) to all of the Smalltalk code contained within
GST then, rather than trying to relicense it piece-by-piece.  They can keep
the GPL for the C code... Squeak already has its own VM. :)

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

I agree with you on using GST code for squeak is not clear. But frankly speaking,
for me, GPL seems better one in terms of social wealth; it can make it sure that
the result be returned to the community/society.

But I'm not saying that everything should be lisenced as GPL. Other lisences have
 their own position/meaning on thier own.

----- Original Message -----
   From: "Randal L. Schwartz" <[hidden email]>
   To: [hidden email]
   Cc: [hidden email]
   Sent: 08-01-09 10:57:00
   Subject: Re: beware GNU Smalltalk if you want to contribute to squeak

  >>>>> "chunsj" == chunsj  <[hidden email]> writes:

Doesn't look like I can just lift part of the libs from GST and use it as-is
in something that is not as restrictive as the LGPL.  Which means I *cannot*
use it as-is in a Squeak distro.  It has to be relicensed under a more-free
license, like MIT or Apache2.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

>>>>> "chunsj" == chunsj  <[hidden email]> writes:

chunsj> I agree with you on using GST code for squeak is not clear.

No, we don't agree on that.  I'm saying that it's *clear* that using GST code
(or any derivative) *for the squeak core distro* is *not allowed*.

chunsj> But frankly speaking, for me, GPL seems better one in terms of social
chunsj> wealth; it can make it sure that the result be returned to the
chunsj> community/society.

And here, we don't agree on this either.  The GPL trades one set of freedoms
for another.  The BSD/Apache/MIT/Perl license trades a different set of
freedoms for another.  There's is nothing inherently *better* about the GPL.

But the fact is, the GPL and the BSD-family licenses do not play well
together, and Squeak is under a BSD-family license.  Therefore, if you *want*
to *ever* contribute to the Squeak core distro, you clearly cannot look at GST
to copy code, and to be safer, you cannot even *look* at the code in fear of
implementing Squeak code in a provably similar way.  Please maintain a
clean-room distance!

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

The license I see for kernel/Object.st also looks pretty clear:

| This file is part of the GNU Smalltalk class library.
|
| The GNU Smalltalk class library is free software; you can redistribute it
| and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License
| as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1, or (at
| your option) any later version.

Paolo

I agree with Diego here and I'd like to ask Randal to stop spreading
fear here and start treat licenses in spirit first, then by the letter.
And in spirit I think GPL (and especially LGPL for Smalltalk case) is
just fine. So, please, keep us out of those license wars. Those wars are
not ours!

Best regards
Janko

Diego Fernández wrote:
--
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si

Hi Janko,

On Jan 9, 2008 1:05 PM, Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Those wars are not ours!

... until they are imposed on you by some over-zealous lawyer, or SCO,
or whoever.

I'm with you, please don't get me wrong. But it's not just one side's
duty to at least have a clean impression of how licenses shape part of
the software world.

Best,

Michael

>> Those wars are not ours!
>
> ... until they are imposed on you by some over-zealous lawyer, or SCO,
> or whoever.
>
> I'm with you, please don't get me wrong. But it's not just one side's
> duty to at least have a clean impression of how licenses shape part of
> the software world.

Agreed.  But taking conclusions from looking at one file rather than,
for example, reading the FAQ (e.g. http://smalltalk.gnu.org/faq/32 which
says "The class library is licensed under the GNU LGPL") is a clear sign
of prejudice.

Paolo

As a result of this thread, I'm happy to explore an option I didn't know existed. I've been using Ruby for things that Squeak doesn't do well or that I don't want to have to manage across all the various versions of images I use.  ...

Hi Michael,

Michael Haupt wrote:

>> Those wars are not ours!
>
> ... until they are imposed on you by some over-zealous lawyer, or SCO,
> or whoever.
>
> I'm with you, please don't get me wrong. But it's not just one side's
> duty to at least have a clean impression of how licenses shape part of
> the software world.

You are right, we need to be vigilant here. What I wanted to point out
is that we need stay out of unnecessary wars, but only be careful about
license situation, so that SCO won't happen to us. And so far we didn't
have any legal Smalltalk license dispute, AFAIK. Ok, someone will said
that this is a consequence of a niche position, but, well, being niche
is also good sometimes :)

To conclude: we should stay away from staring in-fight and press down
one Smalltalk just because someone don't like its license! We need to
encourage a cooperation between Smalltalks instead.

JAnko




--
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si

> I can see that possibility but it's not unreasonable IMO to expect that
> GPL applies to everything since there is no clear separation of VM and
> class library. It might be helpful to somehow emphasize that the VM and
> library have different licenses - perhaps make that FAQ obvious in the
> distribution and/or on the front page of the site.

This is starting to be OT. :-)

However, I'll just point out that:

1) the distribution does have a "Legal issues" page in the manual.

2) FFI is more or less the only gray area where Smalltalk programs
clearly use functionality exported by the VM (and don't simply act as
input data for the VM); other than that, the separation would be clear.
  However, exactly to cover this case the VM has "a special exception
that allows Smalltalk programs to be linked with the functions exported
by the virtual machine".  So whatever happens Smalltalk programs are
clear and only covered by the GPL.

The licenses were discussed at great length with rms, and he agreed that
this particular combination was the best option to keep GNU Smalltalk:
1) free, 2) competitive with other Smalltalks in terms of what the user
can do, 3) competitive with other scripting languages in terms of what
the user can do.

Paolo

Yes. Lgpl which means we would need to relicense it to include it or  
anything derived from it in the squeak core. Any chance of that  
happening?

Sent from my iPhone!

On Jan 9, 2008, at 12:38 AM, Paolo Bonzini <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 09/01/2008, Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Yes. Lgpl which means we would need to relicense it to include it or
> anything derived from it in the squeak core. Any chance of that
> happening?

If your comments only apply to "squeak core" then people not involved
with that can happily use a mix of Squeak and GNU/Smalltalk.  Is that
right?

Where could I find a description of "squeak core"?

Thanks,
    Bruce
--
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/

if you really want to be "open", you should except anything from anywhere, and licenses shouldn't matter,  at least thats how i see it.

what are the major differences in the two licenses?

On Jan 9, 2008 3:01 PM, David Zmick <[hidden email]> wrote:

> if you really want to be "open", you should except anything from anywhere,
> and licenses shouldn't matter,  at least thats how i see it.

Haven't been sued yet, huh?

Cheers!

--Tom Phoenix