Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Guido and Richard

Author:Ken MacLeod
Posted:9/8/2000; 11:36:57 AM
Topic:Guido and Richard
Msg #:21018 (In response to 20994)
Prev/Next:21017 / 21019

Legally legitimate? Yes. That's why people put OpenSource licenses on their software, to make forks possible. Making a fork is not hung on any technicality, either before or after the new license.

The only technicality appears to be that the new license (1.6) is said, by some, to be incompatible with the GPL, whereas the old (1.5.2) license was not. Since 2.0 is derived from 1.6, it, too, must be incompatible with the GPL (if 1.6 is). So the result is either the incompatibility issue has to be resolved (by deciding it's not incompatible or removing the clause) or, to continue to have a Python that is compatible with the GPL, to take the 1.5.2 version (which is GPL compatible) and create a fork that will remain GPL compatible.

I doubt there's enough resources who 1) believe there's a technicality, 2) have enough interest in being GPL compatible, and 3) are ready, willing, and able to work on a Python fork. So let's hope that the technicality issue is resolved.

Note: I was incorrect in saying that Guido or the Python troupe are interested in dual-licensing python with the GPL. Python is not covered under a dual license and new versions will not be dual-licensed. Python (explicitly up to 1.5.2 and contingent on resolving this licensing issue in 1.6 and 2.0) has always been GPL compatible (by intent), but not using or dependent on any GPL code.




This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:34 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.