On Jun 26, 2006, at 6:18 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote:

> Cees De Groot a écrit :
>> On 6/26/06, Pavel Krivanek <squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz> wrote:
>>> You don't expect that's possible to take bootstrapped 3.9 kernel  
>>> image
>>> (http://www.squeaksource.com/KernelImage.html) and make it clean  
>>> from
>>> the licensing perspective?  I don't think that it's more complicated
>>> than Spoon checking.
>>>
>> Well, Spoon's kernel image is so small, you can see all of it running
>> at once :). But I don't see either project precluding the other, in
>> fact.
>> How small is that 3.9 image, code wise?
>
> One of the proposal  (from Tim) -- to check with the laywer I guess  
> -- was to relicensed all the SqL code under APLS2.0. If possible,  
> it will not be that paintfull to migrate from 3.9 and it will get  
> use a ready to use image. Of course it is not incompatible with the  
> Spoon track.
>
> I also proposed a semi automatic way to do that: any code copyright  
> owner not willing to see his code relicensed to APSL2.0 should say  
> so before a given dead line.

This sounds nice, but I'd like to have a lawyer OK it.  Here's a  
hypothetical situation: if Disney doesn't speak up before the date,  
and they later decide that they don't want "their" code licensed  
under APSL2.0, would the argument that they missed the deadline stand  
up against their lawyers in court?  Possibly, but not certainly;  
their lawyers are good at this stuff.  If we're going to bother with  
this license change, we want to do it once, and to have absolutely no  
question about its legality.

Josh


>
> Hilaire
>