<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi, as a result of the recent discussion about the license issues of GNU St and Squeak, I've sent a mail to the FSF license help.<div>So I want to share my mail and the response... maybe is useful to others:</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>------- My mail ----------</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial; font-size: 13px; ">Hi, with the recent release of GNU Smalltalk 3.0, a discussion about<br>LGPL and Smalltalk started in the Squeak Developer mail list. (the<br>most used open source Smalltalk is Squeak which is released under MIT<br>License).<br><br>This mail of the thread:<br><a href="http://www.nabble.com/beware-GNU-Smalltalk-if-you-want-to-contribute-to-squeak-to14700716.html" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); ">http://www.nabble.com/beware<wbr>-GNU-Smalltalk-if-you-want-to<wbr>-contribute-to-squeak-to147007<wbr>16.html</a><br><br>Says basically that LGPL is incompatible with a language like Smalltalk.<br>Where I can find more information on this issue?<br><br>I'm a developer who would like to contribute to both projects, and my<br>concern is: if I develop a package that works in GNU Smalltalk and in<br>Squeak, which is the correct license to choose? (note that in Squeak<br>or GNU Smalltalk loading a package means loading the source code)<br>And if I contribute with patches to both projects, can my patches<br>generate legal problems in the future (in case that someone claims<br>that Squeak violates LGPL?<font class="Apple-style-span" color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px;"><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px;">-------- The response ----------</span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; ">Hello,<br><br>Please accept our apologies for the delay in getting back to you. We<br>rely on volunteer effort and often have difficulties keeping up.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Says basically that LGPL is incompatible with a language like<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Smalltalk. Where I can find more information on this issue?<br></blockquote><br>As long as there is a package system and/or clear namespace separation,<br>it is always possible to see where a program ends and a library starts,<br>even if they ultimately end up in the same VM or runtime.<br><br>I'll gladly answer any specific questions you have on the subject. But I<br>don't think that LGPL is incompatible with any particular language.<br><br><blockquote type="cite">I'm a developer who would like to contribute to both projects, and my<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">concern is: if I develop a package that works in GNU Smalltalk and in<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Squeak, which is the correct license to choose? (note that in Squeak<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">or GNU Smalltalk loading a package means loading the source code) And<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">if I contribute with patches to both projects, can my patches generate<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">legal problems in the future (in case that someone claims that Squeak<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">violates LGPL)?<br></blockquote><br>If you are the copyright holder of the package, you can distribute it<br>under several different licenses concurrently. We call this<br>"dual-licensing". For instance, MySQL AB release their software under<br>both a free license and a proprietary license. So technically speaking,<br>there is nothing stopping you from contributing your package to<br>different projects under different licenses.<br><br>That said, every project has the right to decide their own contributor<br>policies and licensing schemes (the FSF certainly does!). If you tell<br>the Squeak project that you intend to release your code under both<br>licenses to both projects (each with its respective license of course)<br>and they decide to turn your code down, then they are well within their<br>rights to do so.<br><br>I see the matter boiling down to policy decisions, opinions about free<br>software and community goals.<br><br>I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help. But feel free to ask of you have<br>any further questions. I'll do my best to expedite my answer.<br><br>--<br>I am not a lawyer, the above is not legal advice<br><br> Regards, Yoni Rabkin</span></span></font></div><div>-----------------------</div></body></html>