|
From: | David Sugar |
Subject: | Re: [DotGNU]pnetlib and the VRS, SEE and other server concepts |
Date: | Sun, 24 Mar 2002 16:40:06 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 |
Sometimes people will choose to do a disjunctive license, like perl does, so that it can be used either with GPL code or optionally in a manner consistent with some other goal(s) the author has chosen. I personally think the most important goal is to preserve the freedom offered in Free Software for others, and that the GPL is the best vehicle to do this, although I would certainly consider and recommend contributing to other freely licensed packages if they fit some niche we do not already have a GPL'd package in (XFree86 is a good example of this, and it could be argued that so is Apache).
David Gopal.V wrote:
If memory serves me right, Jonathan P Springer wrote:the BSD license, which AFAIK, has been labelled "incompatible" with GPL. (Don't ask me why -- the last time I tried to explain on a different list, a large flame war resulted.)Don't worry this list a bit more enlightened about GPL. AFAIK, BSD license is a "convertible" license -- not "compatible" because it is not copyleft.I'll refrain from designing this blind; I just wanted to be sure these facts were generally available (or refuted).The packet signing idea of PKI is better -- ie PGP style. But SSL is for encryption right ?. We need both !. Use SSL when we have support at the other end. But use PKI everywhere !. The client can chose to ignore/handle it depending on the security required. <xmlpacket signature="...."> ... </xmlpacket> Also we need to consider that we may switch to jabber later.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |