About Sport licenses
why is there the sub-phrase “just that for the Pharo implementation”?
To be clear
On 20 July 2013 11:43, Georg Heeg georg@heeg.de wrote:
Bruce,****
You write: “everyone is happy with MIT so I would suggest going with just
that for the Pharo implementation of Sport”. This is the ESUG mailing list
where Smalltalk Users of all dialects are participating. Thus I ask why is
there the sub-phrase “just that for the Pharo implementation”? What is with
all the other implementations? E.g. VisualWorks where the copyright says:
“©Bruce Badger 2004, 2005, 2006. Licensed under the LGPL.”****
Georg****
Georg Heeg eK, Dortmund und Köthen, HR Dortmund A 12812****
Wallstraße 22, 06366 Köthen****
Tel. +49-3496-214328, Fax +49-3496-214712****
Von: Esug-list [mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org] Im Auftrag
von Bruce Badger
Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Juli 2013 10:08
An: Stéphane Ducasse
Cc: esug-list@lists.esug.org Members
Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses**
Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with MIT so I
would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation of Sport
rather than using a dual license.****
Bruce****
On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
Thanks you all.
This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this is a
good news.
Stef****
On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <
philippe.marschall@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
Hi Sport contributors
Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a
Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is
because it
uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked
Bruce if
Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his
answer:
Steph,
We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in
principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects
was
written by different people.
Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we
can
get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing.
Cheers
Philippe
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org****
--
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/ ****
--
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/
Bruce,
How about MIT for the GemStone implementation?
Dale
----- Original Message -----
| From: "Bruce Badger" bwbadger@gmail.com
| To: "Stéphane Ducasse" stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
| Cc: "esug-list@lists.esug.org Members" esug-list@lists.esug.org
| Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 1:08:07 AM
| Subject: Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses
| Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with MIT
| so I would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation
| of Sport rather than using a dual license.
| Bruce
| On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr >
| wrote:
| | Thanks you all.
|
| | This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this
| | is
| | a good news.
|
| | Stef
|
| | On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <
| | philippe.marschall@gmail.com > wrote:
|
| | > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
|
| | > < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr > wrote:
|
| | >> Hi Sport contributors
|
| | >>
|
| | >> Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is
| | >> a
|
| | >> Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is
| | >> because it
|
| | >> uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
|
| | >> LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I
| | >> asked
| | >> Bruce if
|
| | >> Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here
| | >> is
| | >> his
|
| | >> answer:
|
| | >>
|
| | >> Steph,
|
| | >>
|
| | >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with
| | >> this
| | >> in
|
| | >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different
| | >> dialects was
|
| | >> written by different people.
|
| | >>
|
| | >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
|
| | >>
|
| | >> So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so
| | >> that
| | >> we can
|
| | >> get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
|
| | >
|
| | > Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing.
|
| | >
|
| | > Cheers
|
| | > Philippe
|
| | >
|
| | > _______________________________________________
|
| | > Esug-list mailing list
|
| | > Esug-list@lists.esug.org
|
| | > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
|
| | _______________________________________________
|
| | Esug-list mailing list
|
| | Esug-list@lists.esug.org
|
| | http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
|
| --
| Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
| http://www.openskills.org/
| _______________________________________________
| Esug-list mailing list
| Esug-list@lists.esug.org
| http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Dale,
I think that would be fine too.
One of the aims of Sport is to be the ubiquitous surrogate for missing
standardisation between dialects, and MIT does appear to be a better
licensee if the objective is ubiquity.
I think I'm the only author of the GemStone port, but perhaps you know of
others and perhaps you've added some bits too? :-)
So if you are sure that you know all contributors to GemStone Sport then we
can say that it will join the Pharo port under the MIT license.
The agreed forum for Sport was c.l.s so we should announce any proposed
license changes there too.
Bruce
On 20 July 2013 12:39, Dale K. Henrichs dale.henrichs@gemtalksystems.comwrote:
Bruce,
How about MIT for the GemStone implementation?
Dale
*From: *"Bruce Badger" bwbadger@gmail.com
*To: *"Stéphane Ducasse" stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
*Cc: *"esug-list@lists.esug.org Members" esug-list@lists.esug.org
*Sent: *Saturday, July 20, 2013 1:08:07 AM
*Subject: *Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses
Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with MIT so I
would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation of Sport
rather than using a dual license.
Bruce
On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
Thanks you all.
This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this is a
good news.
Stef
On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <
philippe.marschall@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
Hi Sport contributors
Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a
Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is
because it
uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked
Bruce if
Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his
answer:
Steph,
We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in
principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects
was
written by different people.
Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we
can
get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing.
Cheers
Philippe
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/
Bruce,
I will scan the commit history for GemStone Sport and contact the contributors and ask them to respond.
Thanks,
Dale
----- Original Message -----
| From: "Bruce Badger" bwbadger@gmail.com
| To: "Dale K. Henrichs" dale.henrichs@gemtalksystems.com
| Cc: "esug-list@lists.esug.org Members" esug-list@lists.esug.org,
| "Stéphane Ducasse" stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
| Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:53:02 AM
| Subject: Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses
| Dale,
| I think that would be fine too.
| One of the aims of Sport is to be the ubiquitous surrogate for
| missing standardisation between dialects, and MIT does appear to be
| a better licensee if the objective is ubiquity.
| I think I'm the only author of the GemStone port, but perhaps you
| know of others and perhaps you've added some bits too? :-)
| So if you are sure that you know all contributors to GemStone Sport
| then we can say that it will join the Pharo port under the MIT
| license.
| The agreed forum for Sport was c.l.s so we should announce any
| proposed license changes there too.
| Bruce
| On 20 July 2013 12:39, Dale K. Henrichs <
| dale.henrichs@gemtalksystems.com > wrote:
| | Bruce,
|
| | How about MIT for the GemStone implementation?
|
| | Dale
|
| | | From: "Bruce Badger" < bwbadger@gmail.com >
| |
|
| | | To: "Stéphane Ducasse" < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr >
| |
|
| | | Cc: " esug-list@lists.esug.org Members" <
| | | esug-list@lists.esug.org
| | | >
| |
|
| | | Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 1:08:07 AM
| |
|
| | | Subject: Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses
| |
|
| | | Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with
| | | MIT
| | | so I would suggest going with just that for the Pharo
| | | implementation
| | | of Sport rather than using a dual license.
| |
|
| | | Bruce
| |
|
| | | On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse <
| | | stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
| | | >
| | | wrote:
| |
|
| | | | Thanks you all.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and
| | | | this
| | | | is
| | | | a good news.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | Stef
| | |
| |
|
| | | | On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <
| | | | philippe.marschall@gmail.com > wrote:
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr > wrote:
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Hi Sport contributors
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >>
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there
| | | | >> is
| | | | >> a
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that
| | | | >> this
| | | | >> is
| | | | >> because it
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I
| | | | >> asked
| | | | >> Bruce if
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL
| | | | >> here
| | | | >> is
| | | | >> his
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> answer:
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >>
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Steph,
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >>
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine
| | | | >> with
| | | | >> this
| | | | >> in
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different
| | | | >> dialects was
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> written by different people.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >>
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >>
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail
| | | | >> so
| | | | >> that
| | | | >> we can
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >> get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or
| | | | > relicensing.
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > Cheers
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > Philippe
| | |
| |
|
| | | | >
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > _______________________________________________
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > Esug-list mailing list
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > Esug-list@lists.esug.org
| | |
| |
|
| | | | > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
| | |
| |
|
| | | | _______________________________________________
| | |
| |
|
| | | | Esug-list mailing list
| | |
| |
|
| | | | Esug-list@lists.esug.org
| | |
| |
|
| | | | http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
| | |
| |
|
| | | --
| |
|
| | | Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
| |
|
| | | http://www.openskills.org/
| |
|
| | | _______________________________________________
| |
|
| | | Esug-list mailing list
| |
|
| | | Esug-list@lists.esug.org
| |
|
| | | http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
| |
|
| --
| Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
| http://www.openskills.org/
Hi guys,
I hope we all agree now for MIT so I just changed Sport license on
SqueakSource to MIT, so that now on both SqueakSource and SmalltalkHub
Sport is MIT licensed:
http://www.squeaksource.com/SPort.html
http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~Sport/Sport
Note than there is only one Sport for both Squeak and Pharo and probably
Cuis as well.
Best regards
Janko
Dne 18. 07. 2013 16:05, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
thanks Janko :)
On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek@eranova.si wrote:
Hi Stef,
I as a porter od Sport to Squeak/Pharo am all for Sport to be MIT
licensed. As I understand past conversations with Bruce the dialect
porter/maintainer approval is then a satisfying condition for Sport on
Squeak/Pharo to be MIT licensed.
Best regards
Janko
Dne 18. 07. 2013 12:19, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Hi Sport contributors
Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a
Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because
it uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce
if Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his
answer:
Steph,
We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in
principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects
was written by different people.
Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we
can get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
And yes I'm nervous about mixing licenses in an image-based system that
a infinite minority
of programmers understand or even know.
Stef
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Janko Mivšek
Aida/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Janko Mivšek
Svetovalec za informatiko
Eranova d.o.o.
Ljubljana, Slovenija
www.eranova.si
tel: 01 514 22 55
faks: 01 514 22 56
gsm: 031 674 565
On 23 July 2013 13:14, Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek@eranova.si wrote:
Hi guys,
I hope we all agree now for MIT so I just changed Sport license on
SqueakSource to MIT, so that now on both SqueakSource and SmalltalkHub
Sport is MIT licensed:
http://www.squeaksource.com/SPort.html
http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~Sport/Sport
If I understand correctly, this might be a bit premature. I had to
fill in a paper form declaring my agreement to the relicencing of
Squeak, and I'm pretty sure Pharo had to do the same (because I had to
fill in a similar form for Pharo).
As I understand it, the Sport port folks need to compile a list of
every contributor and get each contributor to formally agree to the
relicencing.
frank
Note than there is only one Sport for both Squeak and Pharo and probably
Cuis as well.
Best regards
Janko
Dne 18. 07. 2013 16:05, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
thanks Janko :)
On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek@eranova.si wrote:
Hi Stef,
I as a porter od Sport to Squeak/Pharo am all for Sport to be MIT
licensed. As I understand past conversations with Bruce the dialect
porter/maintainer approval is then a satisfying condition for Sport on
Squeak/Pharo to be MIT licensed.
Best regards
Janko
Dne 18. 07. 2013 12:19, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Hi Sport contributors
Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a
Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because
it uses Sport and Sport is licensed under
LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce
if Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his
answer:
Steph,
We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in
principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects
was written by different people.
Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity.
So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we
can get a dual license LGPL/MIT.
And yes I'm nervous about mixing licenses in an image-based system that
a infinite minority
of programmers understand or even know.
Stef
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Janko Mivšek
Aida/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
--
Janko Mivšek
Svetovalec za informatiko
Eranova d.o.o.
Ljubljana, Slovenija
www.eranova.si
tel: 01 514 22 55
faks: 01 514 22 56
gsm: 031 674 565
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org