[squeak-dev] Re: Status of 4.0
Ken Causey
ken at kencausey.com
Sun Feb 15 20:50:49 UTC 2009
On Sun, 2009-02-15 at 12:33 -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Matthew -
>
> Has anyone considered licensing those one-liners from VPRI in good
> faith? I.e., instead of saying "this is code of unknown heritage" say
> "this is code contributed by VPRI in EToys 4 under MIT license". Period.
> I don't know if this works for the lawyers but it might be worth a try.
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
Personally I'm not comfortable with that.
But there is an additional wrinkle in that the methods version in eToys
4.0 does not represent the latest versions in 3.10.2-7179 in every case.
I'm not sure where, but we forked off earlier than this. For example in
my 'How to rewrite a license restricted method' email: eToys uses
version 4 as the current version whereas 3.10.2-7179 uses 5. Minor in
this case, but perhaps problematic in others.
Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090215/a1cbe400/attachment.pgp
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|