Giuseppe Luigi Punzi wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> 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 Trunk.
> 
> Probably the answer is obvious, but I think is good to have it clear.

Of course! Your code is your code, you own it, you can release it under 
any license of your chosing. We require that when you want to put it 
into the trunk it must be available as MIT so that everyone gets ONE 
license in the image they download but outside of that it's up to you. 
Your code, your license.

FWIW, my favorite is the WTFPL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL).

Cheers,
   - Andreas