[squeak-dev] On the swazoo list

Jason Johnson jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 24 19:39:30 UTC 2008


On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Bruce Badger <bwbadger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Ah!  The wayback machine to the rescue:
>  http://web.archive.org/web/20020211054006/http://sourceforge.net/projects/swazoo/
>
>  Not quite 2000, but you can see that from that every version of the
>  page over many years clearly showed LGPL.  Note too that I was not a
>  project admin, so I had no way of setting the license or changing it.

Great, thanks.  I'll look at this.

>  I think it would be rather disingenuous of Janko to suggest that I
>  have suddenly started saying that Swazoo is under the LGPL.  Janko's
>  MIT conversion is altogether far more sudden.

Well, I don't want to put words in his mouth.  That's just how I
interpreted his responses.

(this is the best I could find:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-March/126849.html
    but I thought he said something closer to my summarization.  I
can't seem to find it though).

>  >  So from his description it sounds like an attempt
>  >  at forcing the software into LGPL simply by "injecting" your own LGPL
>  >  code into it.  Which would, of course, be every bit as reprehensible
>  >  as the "software mugging" you describe.
>
>  If you look at the version history of Swazoo in the Cincom public
>  Store and at the archive of the Swazoo mailing list you'll see that I
>  wasn't just injecting a bit of code here and there :-)

In the theoretical situation I described, the amount of code wouldn't
matter.  It would be someone contributing a bunch of code under a
different license and trying to do a "hostile take-over".



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list