[squeak-dev] Re: facelifting the trunk?
Giuseppe Luigi Punzi
glpunzi at lordzealon.com
Wed Sep 16 07:34:28 UTC 2009
El mié, 16-09-2009 a las 00:31 -0700, Andreas Raab escribió:
> Andreas Raab wrote:
> > David Corking wrote:
> >> If the community agrees to get code from somewhere else (in this case
> >> from Newspeak) then that code may have an MIT-compatible license. My
> >> question is: does Squeak have a policy to say whether such foreign
> >> code may be committed to the trunk?
> > All source code committed to the trunk must be available as MIT. In
> > other words, it is not acceptable to commit code to the trunk that's not
> > available under MIT. No exceptions.
> PS. I realize that the reasoning may not be obvious so here it is
> spelled out explicitly: Basically, we don't want to make judgments about
> what licenses are compatible with what other licenses. We're not
> lawyers, we have really no clue what the result of combining different
> licenses is. We need a simple story so the quid pro quo is: If you want
> your stuff in the trunk you must make it available as MIT, so that our
> story remains simple and consistent and keeps the lawyers off our
> collective behinds. If you can't do that, well, tough luck, you might
> want to think ahead the next time you choose a license.
But, you must agree MIT license, only if you want code integrated in the
image, true? This is not mandatory to packages, or code outside the
Probably the answer is obvious, but I think is good to have it clear.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev