Sublicensing

Jack Johnson fragment at nas.com
Tue Aug 19 15:46:47 UTC 2003


goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
> To me "Squeak" has always meant the image AND the available VM ports.

This is an interesting side of the licensing question(s).

Suppose someone wrote a different system that ran on top of the Squeak 
VM, or that someone was able to get a Squeak image running on top of 
(probably some intermediate VM on top of) Parrot?

In terms of the questions that have arisen regarding "a collection of 
files" and what the definition of source or change means to the image, 
it might make sense to think of the two parts separately, even if they 
ultimately have the same license.

For instance, if the Unix VM has/had a license that was acceptable to 
the FSF, why not include *just* the VM in Debian, et. al?  Even that 
would be better than the current scenario (if wider distribution is the 
goal).

-Jack



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list