Announcing to the world..

Tom tmb at lumo.com
Wed Apr 18 05:14:53 UTC 2001


On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 11:19:45PM -0400, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> What is "more clearly open source?"  

There seem to be three specific issues with the Squeak license
that have been discussed on the list:

 -- The presence of Apple fonts appears to limit any for-profit
    redistribution.  This might limit distribution of Squeak
    on CD-ROMs or even from commercial download sites.

 -- The way I understand the license, I have to make modifications to
    existing methods in the base image available even if I don't 
    redistribute anything.  That doesn't make a lot of sense, and
    the Squeak

 -- The issue of export restrictions has been raised on the list.

> GPL is impossible for a monolithic image system [...]

Well, if you want to figure out how to define a GPL-like license
for Squeak-like systems, that's your problem.  I'm not interested
in the GPL and I'd be happy with some simple clarifications to the 
existing license.  In fact, I think the biggest issue is just
replacing the Apple fonts and removing the associated restrictions.

Thomas.





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list