Announcing to the world..
Tom
tmb at lumo.com
Wed Apr 18 05:14:53 UTC 2001
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 11:19:45PM -0400, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> What is "more clearly open source?"
There seem to be three specific issues with the Squeak license
that have been discussed on the list:
-- The presence of Apple fonts appears to limit any for-profit
redistribution. This might limit distribution of Squeak
on CD-ROMs or even from commercial download sites.
-- The way I understand the license, I have to make modifications to
existing methods in the base image available even if I don't
redistribute anything. That doesn't make a lot of sense, and
the Squeak
-- The issue of export restrictions has been raised on the list.
> GPL is impossible for a monolithic image system [...]
Well, if you want to figure out how to define a GPL-like license
for Squeak-like systems, that's your problem. I'm not interested
in the GPL and I'd be happy with some simple clarifications to the
existing license. In fact, I think the biggest issue is just
replacing the Apple fonts and removing the associated restrictions.
Thomas.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|