harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Wielaard <m...@klomp.org>
Subject Re: [arch] VM/Classlibrary Interface (take 2)
Date Wed, 20 Jul 2005 23:02:31 GMT

On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 12:38 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > The reason nobody answered this question is because we are still  
> > debating how to accept code that is both GPLv2 and ASLv2 compatible.
> I'm not sure that's the issue exactly - I think it's about dual  
> licensing.

No it is not. That would create all kinds of trouble for us to track who
contributed what under which terms. This really is just about coming up
with a simple default contribution policy that is acceptable to all. As
Leo explained so graphically people don't want lists of options or
difficult decision diagrams. We want to provide a simple contribution
policy that gets us in a situation that all contributed code is ASLv2
and GPLv2 compatible by default. Then there is no confusion or need to
track things (except of course the FSF/ASF individual/company
contribution/disclaimer paperwork).

We could do that by asking every contribution to be dual licensed
GPL/ASL, but that might be too confusing to some. So I propose we just
pick MIT/X for now and be done with it. (Or any other option I mentioned
in a couple of mails if you really don't like MIT/X.)



View raw message