ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <dona...@mad.scientist.com>
Subject Re: licensing (was: Ant gui tool)
Date Sat, 21 Oct 2000 01:06:14 GMT
>I have been mailing licensing@gnu.org, and have been frustrated at their
>continual requests that I clarify myself when asking very simple questions
>(that they certainly get everyday.)  Actually, I'm shifting the blame to
>me; their words are that no conflict exists.

can you post the emails or get permission to post them ? When other people
have emailed them (such as Brian guy who runs apache and other people who I
have asked to email them) the response has been negative. Generally they go
straight to RMS thou so .... not sure. Thou GNU generally falls to RMSs
opinions in long runs ... 

>> Apache does not require anything to be "APL compatable" it only restricts
>> the way in which it is distributed (must state that it uses Apache software
>> in program and must not use same name as apache product if it has been
>> modified). 
>
>I was told that anything under a gnu license woudn't be distributed with
>Ant.  The clear inference was that GNU = APL incompatible, therefore can't
>be distributed with Ant.

nope. APL is GPL incompatable. It is not the APL that makes the restriction
but GPL. Read it again.

>There are a number of GPLed tools that produce buildfiles for later Ant
>processing.  The inference also is that they wouldn't be distributed with
>Ant, though it is not illegal to make such tools.

right.

>Is this a minefield? Yes, so is proprietary licensing.  It is likely
>unwise for me to have gotten into this discussion; people have such strong
>feelings on the subject that the best communication is with the licenses
>themselves.

don't worry I am ex-GPL guy. However at the pace java moves it is
impractical to use it here.

>My point still stands, it is possible to dual-license advantageously. 
>IIRC, there is also a clause that can be inserted in GPL'ed programs,
>reserving that the original author may grant exceptions to the GPL on
>whim.  This may also be used advantageously.

The copyright owner can always do this regardless of what license they
place it under. The problem arises when they accept patches of more than 10
lines. There is now 2 copyright owners and thus can't be done unless both
agree. Now repeat this many times and you get the problem.


Cheers,

Pete

*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |
*------------------------------------------------------*

Mime
View raw message