* Bert Freudenberg (email@example.com) [040317 12:18]:
> Anyway, this point is moot because I don't see the Squeak License being
> modified any time soon.
This is what i have been waiting for for quite a few mails now.
i conclude that proper cource of action is to either
- drop squeak
- build a installation package which gets the existing squeak
packages and installes them, displaying the license and
everything. that makes us not distribute the software and gets
us out of the sqeak, sorry: squeez.
> I don't see any conflicts. But that's maybe just me, being a hacker
> instead of a lawyer (and proud of it).
we have firstname.lastname@example.org for that. people with
bigger/differnt brains are thinking about legal (especially
licencing and patent) stuff there.