Movatterモバイル変換
[0]ホーム
Komodo in violation of Mozilla Public License?
phil huntphilh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk
Thu Apr 12 06:23:25 EDT 2001
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:57:20 -0500 (CDT), Chris Watson <chris at voodooland.net> wrote:>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----->Hash: SHA1>>>>> > Komodo is not Open Source or Free Software, true.>>> Avoiding lock-in needn't prevent a software company from gaining>> revenue from the sale-value of their software; a time-deleyed oepn>> source license allows both criteria to sit comfortably. Have>> ActiveState considered that for Komodo, e.g. a license that releases>> the current Komodo code as GPL (or some other license) in, say,>> 3 years' time?>>Absolutley not! Active State can do what EVER they want it is their code.>Of course. But I would be shocked in horror to see them use the GPL to>release it after n ammount of years. The GPL and variants might be fine>for people who have an "agenda". But it is not a license that promotes>free use of its code. And since I think we just established that a work>put out into the public under the BSDL, or public domain is *impossible*>to close up or remove off the planet, there is no reason not to use>either. Unless of course like I said you have an agenda, or are not>interested in helping others with freely useable code.The reason I suggested the GPL is that it might fit ActiveState'spurposes because another company couldn't put ActiveState's codein a proprietary, competing product, and not share their changeswith ActiveState.>> I personally have no problems with Komodo being released on a>> non- Open Source license.>>Me either. It's there work. Glad you think they they have the right to use>their work as they see fit. :-)Even if they want to GPL it?-- *****[ Phil Hunt *****philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk ]*****"Mommy, make the nasty penguin go away." -- Jim Allchin, MS head of OS development, regarding open source software (paraphrased).
More information about the Python-listmailing list
[8]ページ先頭