Posted Dec 14, 2010 15:54 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link]
The text you quote is inspired by the Apache announcement, which says "participants are allowed to use whatever license...they desire." If that text turns out to be incorrect - perhaps they meant "whatever free license" - then my interpretation will obviously be incorrect and will need to be fixed up.
Licenses
Posted Dec 14, 2010 16:09 UTC (Tue) by rgardler (guest, #71845)
[Link]
The text you have may be "inspired" by the text of the press release, but not factual in any way.
The press release doesn't say explicitly "open source licenses only", but since Google Code requires licenses to be open source we didn't really see the need to be that explicit ;-)
Anyway, to remove any confusion whatsever apache-extras will not allow proprietary licences. It will allow Free and Open Source licences that cannot be used for code hosted on ASF infrastructure - including one-way compatible licences such as the GPLv3.
Licenses
Posted Dec 14, 2010 16:25 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link]
In fact, it expicitly says "whatever license." If you didn't mean "whatever license," it would have been good not to say "whatever license."
In any case, my apologies for the misinterpretation, the item has been changed.
Licenses
Posted Dec 14, 2010 16:36 UTC (Tue) by rgardler (guest, #71845)
[Link]
Yeah, you are right. We clearly live in a world where "whatever license" means "whatever FOSS licence". If only the rest of the world thought that way too...
Thanks for the update to your article.
Licences
Posted Dec 14, 2010 20:39 UTC (Tue) by coriordan (guest, #7544)
[Link]
Updating the press release would also be a good idea ("...to use whatever free software license..."). I also would have assumed it meant that proprietary licences would be accepted. Since Google distributes proprietary software, the mention of "Google-hosted" doesn't clarify the licence situation.
Thanks for dropping by with the good news. I'm relieved to hear Apache won't be delivering proprietary software.