On Nov 21, 2007, at 3:55 , tim Rowledge wrote:

> Oh, and I *think* that strictly speaking we're not in the business  
> of relicensing the system as MIT; Apple relicensed the 1.1 release  
> under the Apache 2.0 license and we are trying to get everything  
> added subsequently to be under MIT. So far as I can work out that  
> means the *system* as a whole will be legally Apache 2.0 but I am  
> not a lawyer and I don't even play one on TV.

Indeed - the board is trying to get clarification on this from VPRI's  
lawyers.

What we can say for sure is the history of events to date:

==========
On 23 September 1996, Apple Computer Inc. released Squeak V1.1 under  
the "Squeak License" (SqL).

On May 8, 2006 Apple agreed to relicense original Squeak Code under  
the "Apple Public Source License 2.0" (APSL 2.0).

On October 12, 2006 Apple granted permission to relicense under  
Apache 2.0.

In 2006, VPRI began to collect "Distribution Agreements" for all  
contributors to Squeak since V1.1 up to V3.8, asking them to  
relicense their contributions, which were originally licensed under  
SqL, to the MIT license. This was a great effort on behalf of many  
and VPRI has 100s of signed documents agreeing to this.
==========

This, I think, should be mentioned on http://www.squeak.org/ 
SqueakLicense/ which is somewhat fuzzy.

- Bert -