On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> Not quite. BSD does not enforce giving back to the community. If you
> work at a company using BSD-licensed code, you can not go to your
> employer and say look, I *have* to publish these modifications I did to
> the base system, because otherwise we are violating the license and can
> not use this wonderful system. They can just force you to work all day
> on proprietary code that nobody will ever see. You know, there are
> companies who do not like to give away their code.
Well, OK I understand your point. In this case I'd suggest to foreward
this to the email@example.com list and ask for clarification.
I'm no expert in licensing but there might be solutions.
> Anyway, this point is moot because I don't see the Squeak License being
> modified any time soon. There is no reason to. You can use and modify
> Squeak in commercial or non-profit settings, in proprietary or
> open-source environments. People are doing just that, now.
If I remember right the only problem is in the fonts. But I'm not
well informed and as I said I'm not a legal expert. That's why I
hope that some interested people would move this thread to the
experts at debian-legal list.
> I don't see any conflicts. But that's maybe just me, being a hacker
> instead of a lawyer (and proud of it).
:) Me too.
It would be nice if you are right here.
> Well, as I said, it would be great if Debian would include Squeak. It's
> not like Squeak's future depends on it (because one of its main
> advantages is that it runs on *any* platform), but it still would be a
> very welcome way to make it known and accessible to more people.
This is exactly the sense of my words ...
> Me neither. That was more to wake your interest in Squeak. I like
> actually doing things much better then talking license mumbo.
Me too. That's why I'm grabbing my Debian-Med hut now and leave this