[Squeakfoundation]Re: Sublicensing seems possible

[Cees de Groot]

On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 05:23, Ted Kaehler wrote:
> 	Since you have seen and worked with the Xerox and Apple code 
> inside Squeak, you can't generate parallel 'clean room' code 
> yourself.  Some stranger would have to do it.
> 
I know. Worse, I work with VW and sometimes apply tricks from VW code to
Squeak. Or from GNU Smalltalk code. Or from Squeak to VW. Or ... Just
like most Smalltalkers out in the field (lots of them work with more
than one version). 

Licensing-wise, Smalltalk is a complete mess - you cannot generally open
the source and still hope that all the cross-contamination you get from
there does not work... Personally, I think ignoring the matter is the
best solution ;-)

Anyway, if your statement is based on experience from 7 years ago that's
ok. Apple learnt a lot since that time, and my contacts seem to indicate
that they are not willing to change the license (simply because they're
happy with it as far as their side of the deal is concerned) but they
are willing to discuss other ways out of the 'not OSI/DFSG compatible'
impasse.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lnx-12.ams-2.theinternetone.net/pipermail/squeakfoundation/attachments/20030402/7ee1e829/attachment.bin