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
|