Erik Engbrecht wrote:
-1 to complicating the license situation, but no objections to using
GPL+Classpath code for research purposes.
I find it complicated to know the difference between researching code and deriving something from it; it's much easier on the programmer to work across exactly the same license when possible. Of course, that brings up the question of from where any given project would like to do the most "deriving", but for Scala I should think Java would be it. Most of Java is now licensed under the GPL with classpath exception, the rest plain GPL (
http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#b3), so the former is what I would use if I were starting a new JVM-targeted language today. (I'm not sure what CLR brings to the table license wise.)
As I read Scala's LICENSE it says that Lausanne has copyright to pretty much the whole shebang, so, it would trivial to relicense. (I mean, compared to other projects or something originally proprietary like Java.) Maybe it's not worth the trouble. I don't know. Most custom OSS licenses eventually seem to be replaced by standard ones, or variations of standard ones. If that ever happens for Scala, I would hope the GPL with classpath exception is at least considered and not ruled out because of common misunderstandings. It's a good license, and the fact that Sun chose it (Sun!) should have put to bed the idea that it is eccentric.
Nathan
