cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Litrik De Roy <cocoon-...@litrik.com>
Subject Re: Using Maven (or something similar) for dependencies? (Was: Co coon's Rhino+continuations fork)
Date Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:36:24 GMT
Ralph Goers wrote:

>...
>And although Rhino isn't GPL, from what I read of the Mozilla license it
>also has the requirement that anything that it is packaged with must also be
>under the Mozilla license, which makes it just as bad as the GPL from a
>commercial standpoint.
>...
>
>Ralph
>  
>
Hum.... that's the same impression I got after reading the responses on 
this list by some of the Mozilla people.

But there seems to be a difference in the MPL 
(http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.html) between modifying source code 
and using the executable in a larger piece of software.

When you modify the source code 3.1 clearly states that these 
modifications should be MPL as well: "The Modifications which You create 
or to which You contribute are governed by the terms of this License".

But when you simply use the executable version of MPL code in a larger 
piece of software 3.7 says the following:
"You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered Code with other code 
not governed by the terms of this License and distribute the Larger Work 
as a single product. In such a case, You must make sure the requirements 
of this License are fulfilled for the Covered Code."

Note that the end of the line says "Covered Code" and not "Larger Work". 
So the "Covered Code" that is MPL, stays MPL. But anything surrounding 
it ("Larger Work") does *not* automatically become MPL as well . This is 
(IMHO) the difference with GPL.

But IANAL...

-- 

Litrik De Roy
www.litrik.com



Mime
View raw message