Re: Questions

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 03:44:00AM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Aleksey Sanin">
> 
> > Free software != GPLed / LGPLed software. Mozilla, OpenSSL, Apache and lot
> > of other free software have non-GPL compatible licenses
> > (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses).
> > Does this mean that GNOME project should reject it and any code derived
> > from it? Personally I think that this will not help GNOME. IMHO,
> > restrictions do not help to move forward.
> 
> It would be inordinately hard for us to integrate non-(L)GPL compatible code
> into GNOME when our Developer Platform is primarily LGPL'ed whilst our
> Desktop and other releases are primarily GPL'ed.
> 
>   (Note that Mozilla is almost entirely MPL/GPL/LGPL'ed, and thus entirely
>   compatible with GNOME Platform and Desktop licenses.)
> 
> This is not a matter of stubbornness or self-imposed restrictions - it's the
> basic reality of working with multiple Free Software licenses.

  The X11/MIT familly of licenses is also popular and don't give troubles.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/