Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

[squeak-dev] Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

105 messages Options

1 ... 3456

Bruce Badger

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

On 26/03/2008, Sebastian Sastre <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Well said Janko. I'm glad to hear people trying to move forward for the better,

"moving forward" really should not included copyright infringement.

But perhaps you disagree?

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

Janko Mivšek

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

In reply to this post by Bruce Badger

Bruce Badger wrote:

> On 26/03/2008, Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I'd like to kindly ask everyone to refrain from further commenting in
>> public until some of us original authors and later contributors like
>> Bruce in private come to agreement. Any public debate in strong tones at
>> that time wont contribute to successful end of our negotiations. Please
>> help us that way.
>
> Janko, this seems to suggest that you feel that there is some doubt
> about the fact that Swazoo is licensed under the LGPL.
>
> Could you please make a clear statement on this? Do you, or do you
> not accept that Swazoo is under the LGPL and has been since the
> inception of the project?

Bruce, I just read a mail from Ken Treis that he and others decided on
LGPL already on Camp Smalltalk 2000 while I was busy working on code and
didn't follow a debate. If I would I would agree then too on LGPL.

So this is now clear, Swazoo is LGPL from start until now.

That I didn't make this statement before is only because I didn't want
to make such statement alone, without hearing others first. As you know
one such solistic action already made much of that thread :)

Best regards
JAnko

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

Bruce Badger

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

On 26/03/2008, Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Bruce, I just read a mail from Ken Treis that he and others decided on
> LGPL already on Camp Smalltalk 2000 while I was busy working on code and
> didn't follow a debate. If I would I would agree then too on LGPL.
>
> So this is now clear, Swazoo is LGPL from start until now.

Janko,

I would like to thank you very much indeed for making this so clear.

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

Sebastian Sastre-2

RE: [squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

In reply to this post by Bruce Badger

>
> On 26/03/2008, Sebastian Sastre <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Well said Janko. I'm glad to hear people trying to move
> forward for the better,
>
> "moving forward" really should not included copyright infringement.
>
> But perhaps you disagree?
>
I did not disagree on that but then which is the damage?
Can you help to quantify it to see if this debate worth it?

Best,

Sebastian

Bruce Badger

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Swazoo - LGPL or MIT?

On 26/03/2008, Sebastian Sastre <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I did not disagree on that but then which is the damage?
> Can you help to quantify it to see if this debate worth it?

I'm not seeking damages, only clarity.

But it seems that we have everything back on an even keel now that
Janko has so kindly made his position clear on the Squeak list.

I am, frankly, relieved. I am rather a fan of Squeak and I did not at
all enjoy the recent discussions.

You may be interested to know that discussions about licensing are
indeed under way among various Swazoo contributors. I hope these
discussions can move to the Swazoo list once I gain access to it once
more.

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

1 ... 3456