[OT] license foo (was: Splitting diff functionality out of libsvn_delta)

On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 07:53:33AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
>...
> > Since the Apache license is just a modified BSD license with 3 extra
> > clauses and the Subversion license is just a modified Apache license
> > that uses a phrase other than "Apache", I figured it would be less
> > confusing just to say BSD (even shorter than BSD-like) and be done with
> > it. :)
>
> For those of us who *are* GPL types, calling the Apache licence BSD-like
> is pretty confusing; the modern BSD licence is compatible with the GPL,
> but the Apache licence isn't, due to the don't-use-our-name clause. (Not
> wishing to start a flamewar about that, though; it's been hashed out
> rather extensively elsewhere.)

But you *are* doing exactly that [flamewar]. The Apache license *is*
BSD-like in the sense that it gives users rights more similar to the BSD
license than any of the other licenses out there.

GPL compatibility doesn't make a license BSD-like or not. The rights granted
to users is the primary factor. At the highest level, the distinguishing
factor between BSD/Apache and GPL is the requirement to publish changes. In
that respect, the Apache license is BSD-ish.

*shrug*

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org