Sublicensing

Daniel Vainsencher danielv at netvision.net.il
Fri Aug 15 20:12:48 UTC 2003


I gave the VM as an example. To end up with a completely free squeak,
we'd need to eventually replace all the code we cannot get relicensed as
free software.

This will take a lot of time, and somewhat change how we do things, and
people need to decide if its what they want. One positive aspect of
having to rewrite everything is that it makes it easier to mini-"burn
the disc packs". We'd be replacing whole subsystems anyway, so putting
some new ideas in there would be easier.

So if we look at it really positively, it does have an exciting aspect
;-)

Daniel

Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus <schwa at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 09:27:14PM +0200, Stephane Ducasse wrote:
> > >>Now, this lawyer is not a copyright/opensource expert, and it is
> > >>possible we'll find someone more confident about getting smart. But I
> > >>think we need to start planning on solving this problem by organizing
> > >>*and by coding*, rather than by PR, lawyers or licensing. I say this
> > >>quite sadly, because this will not be easy to do :-( OTOH, it could be
> > >>fun. Anyone care to design a new VM? :-)
> > >>
> > 
> > Just  a naive question. If we would come up with a new VM, this would 
> > solve the problem?
> 
> No.  We'd have to replace all the Collection classes, Magnitude
> classes, etc.  Eg: pretty much anything in Squeak up to the point
> that Squeak Central left Apple.  And maybe more.
> 
> > What means a new VM exactly how different would it have to be?
> > Stef
> 
> Ask a lawyer!  That's a very good question.  Probably not that
> different, since this VM is based on the blue-book spec.  Just
> as long as code is not copied directly.
> 
> Joshua (IANAL)



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list