[Squeakfoundation]Re: Sublicensing seems possible
danielv at netvision.net.il
Tue Apr 1 18:33:39 CEST 2003
1. No, I think your questions are mostly to the point. But you did
directly ask Andrew. I have also in the past sometimes failed to get an
answer from Andrew, either getting one that didn't answer what I meant
(which I assume was misunderstanding), or not getting one at all. Andrew
owes me nothing, of course, I'm just saying we shouldn't take this
either personally or as very surprising.
2. I'm sorry, I simply got tired :-(. Though it may seem otherwise, I
find it a pain to think about these license/legal issues.
Cees, did you get an answer about posting your conversation log with
Everybody, as Andrew said, if we want to change the license, we need
some concensus. So let's hear people. I want to bring this to squeak-dev
after we have some well worked out options. The list as I see it is
below. If you want to help bring this to closure, develop the option you
1. SqueakL is fine. I don't want to hear about these license anymore.
2. OSI compliance is good. (someone else is welcome to represent this
3. DFSG compliant is good. We want to be able to distribute Squeak
through Debian. We want to recruit people that work on free software for
fun. We want people to use Squeak knowing it's safe, because it is free
goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> Hi all and Andrew!
> (since I didn't want to revive this thread on squeak-dev I CCed Andrew
> since I am not sure Andrew is on the SqF-list)
> Two very simple questions:
> 1. Are my questions that I posted (see
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/squeak/message/58816 among others) so
> stupid that they aren't worth replying to? If they are then please
> people, *say* so. That way I can shut up and stop making a fool of
> myself by asking questions and being ignored.
> 2. Are we simply going to drop this ball just like we do every time it
> is brought up? And I am not only talking about changing Squeak-L, most
> of the issues at hand are about how we handle license questions in the
> new package oriented Squeak.
> There you all go, short and to the point! :-)
> I just want to know because I don't want to spend time asking questions
> and trying to straighten out how these things should work if my views
> and questions aren't taken seriously and I am being ignored.
> regards, Göran
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Squeakfoundation