Python no longer GPL-compatible (Squeak implications?)
bparsia at email.unc.edu
Sun Sep 10 13:51:24 UTC 2000
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jonathan Coupe wrote:
> I'm more concerned with the huge number of people who don't use Squeak but
> one of the alternatives.
Why? I mean, I feel *sorry* for them, but it doesn't *concern* me
vis-a-vis lots of things, including Squeak's viability.
> Squeak is 1/100 to 1/000 as widely used as, for
> instance, Python.
*For instance*? While I'm sure Squeak is 1/100 as used as somethings and
1/*1*000 (the 1/000 was a fun type :)) as used as other things, it's
surely not a metric useful all on it's lonesome.
Plus, I'd want to see some sources for the figures, which seem rather
random. Furthermore, Squeak has been "on the market" for a shorter period
than Python, but has been growing rapidly *in spite of* not *yet* having
had a "really for the public" release. We're getting way closer, and
pretty rapidly. (I tend to think of the "3.0" release as the regulative
ideal of a public release :)) But I'd think we'd want Jitter, the Interval
web brower, general cleanup (especially of Morphic), a blessed UI
browser, some formalish documentation, etc. before counting it a public
Until then, too rapid growth can be a drag instead of a boost. I tend to
think we're assimilating new people into the community about as fast as
we can (and if you look at the mailing list archives on egroups, you'll
see a steady and large growth in traffic on this list).
3-4 years ago people were arguing that python need to add this and that
and do this and that in order not to lose to perl and java, and that
python was going to be crushed and yadda yadda yadda yadda.
Now Python is our Perl :) We should, I think, take a lesson from *their*
> Python, but Python with its huge market share can afford it. It might be
> wise for an almost un-used system like Squeak
It's *not* almost un-used. It's used quite a bit (your "1/100-1/1000" is
misleading; if python's base is huge, then 1/1000 the base might be quite
widly used indeed). It's used by teachers, commercial entities,
If Interval Research didn't have a problem with the licence (although, to
be fair, they were research focused and had a lot of funds, *buuuut* they
were aiming at commercializable spinoffs), then I'm not going to quibble.
I wish folks who worry about the rather esoteric details of the licence
would bring specific *lawyer verified* problems and possible
Naturally, situations vary, but AFAIK, none of the commerical entities
using Squeak---even as the *foundation* of their business---have felt the
need to raise these issues or negotiate a different licence with
Disney. If they have, it'd be nice to hear about it.
More information about the Squeak-dev