Serge Stinckwich <Serge.Stinckwich at info.unicaen.fr> wrote:
[SNIP]
> > My personal recommendation is MIT dual licensed with SqueakL but that
> > would of course completely erase any GNUish mechanisms.
> 
> I like your idea of dual licensed mechanism, do you have any more concrete wording of this kind of combination ?
> I think it could be of great benefits for all the developpers who want to release code for Squeak and don't want to
> be bothered by licensing issues. Like you, i didn't like SqueakL too much

Actually it is exactly as simple as it sounds. You simply release the
code under both those licenses. It is a quite common practice. As the
author you have the full right give the software under license A to
customer X and under license B to customer y. TrollTech was one of the
more known examples of this when they duallicensed Qt under GPL for the
FSF community and under a proprietary license to their paying customers.
Everybody happy.

So you don't "combine" the licenses - instead you just say:

This code is available under the SqueakL or under the MIT license. Pick
any you like. (And of course you need to include the license in
question. Don't forget to add your name and year to the MIT template).

Again personally I like the MIT minimalistic license. At least for my
work in the Squeak community. A more "free" license than that is more or
less impossible. Sure, someone can use that code to make money etc, but
so what? Go ahead! This is IMHO one of the strenghts with Squeak etc. -
that I can embed it in a proprietary product if I want to. Otherwise I
wouldn't be as interested in it.

> > Note: There are multiple issues at hand like "Do we want multiple
> > licenses in base Squeak?" "Answer: No!" and "Are we talking about
> > distribution as image or as sourcecode?". Personally I am not sure what
> > happens if a package in sourceform is distributed "on the side" together
> > with an image.
> 
> Yes, multiple licenses enhance confusion, but if we have only two choices : SqueakL and SqueakL + MIT license, 
> for people that don't like SqueakL, it could be nice !

Yes. But there is nothing that needs to be done for you to use this
today. The rule is simple:

For anything you want to enter the "Squeak base" - put it under SqueakL
and then add as many other licenses as you see fit. :-)

regards, Göran

PS. Perhaps we should add MIT to the licenses to choose from at SM. Note
that you can select multiple licenses - just use the select box further
down to add more categories.