tim Rowledge a écrit :
> 
> On 20-Jun-06, at 1:36 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote:
> 
>> Dear all,
>>
>> May be we could refocus on the subject of the thread, then think 
>> about the details later.
>>
>> So far only Marcus wrote he will participate to such a meeting.  Graid
>> said he would like but he cannot.
>> I am curious to know what think the other.
> 
> Sadly there's no chance I could join the meeting; time and money 
> preclude it. To those that can make it I can only offer support from 
> the sidelines along with the statement that any bit of code I've ever 
> submitted can be considered to be under any license that is plausible 
> for Squeak.

Tim you are pointing a very important point. After the announce of the
change to APSL2.0 of Squeak1.1, we have to ask ourself which part of
{Squeak3.8}\{Squeak1.1} can be relicensed and probably much more
important which part cannot be relicensed.
The idea about a migration meeting is to determine as far as possible
which parts are relicenceable and which parts are not.
We need to draft a boundary between what we can keep and what we need to
remove/rewrite/replace.
And of course we have to considerer in one hand the VM part and in the
other hand the Image part.

At the end, if we can just have a list of the packages and their license
statute it will be very helpful to move Squeak toward a free software
community compatible state :)

A friend of me, told me he is interested by Squeak, but he is not yet
considering it because Squeak is not seen as free software by the free
software community. In the other he's willing to help and to rewrite
small part to help to move Squeak toward a free software community
compatible state :)

For him, such a list of parts with needed care will be helpful. I guess
other people may fell the same and join more easily in case we have a
cleared road map toward freeness.


Hilaire