The issue is important if we wanted to port other libraries directly to Scala, as these would be derived works and could have restricted licenses accordingly. E.g., if we want to port JCL directly to Scala, then we'd have to put the resulting code under the GPL, because that is what the GPL requires. If we say that scalay can only contain code under the current BSD license, then we have to be careful not to port any code whose derived works cannot be licensed with BSD.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Miles Sabin
<miles@...> wrote:
> No, you don't have it wrong. The GPL is viral, and consequently a lot of
> commercial entities avoid GPL'd code. Ergo, if Scala and lift were infected
> with the GPL virus, both would be much less attractive to the commercial
> world.
GPL virus?
Reasonable people can disagree about the relative merits of the GPL
vs. more BSD-like licenses, so can we please avoid emotive language
...
My view is that since both the Scala compiler and libraries and the
Eclipse plugin are under BSD-style licenses, then it would make sense
for projects like scala[xz] which aim to feed into them to do the
same, otherwise there'll be issues with relicensing later.
Cheers,
Miles
