[SVN] licenses, redistributing perl
Allan Odgaard
allan at macromates.com
Sat Feb 19 18:15:34 UTC 2005
On Feb 19, 2005, at 18:22, Eric Hsu wrote:
> 1. Allan notes correctly that I was using HTML::Entities, which I
> thought was a standard library but was sadly mistaken. The easiest
> solution was to include the library (it's 16K). [...]
What is wrong with doing the entity substitution inline instead of
calling encode_entities?
> 2. Allan said he needed to eventually look into the license under
> which we are contributing stuff. I would think the Perl Artistic
> License works. He can still charge money for the editor and bundle all
> the extra stuff for free. We all keep our copyrights and people can
> use our work. They can even modify it if they either keep their
> changes private, or if they make it public, then the reveal the source
> and note the changes. Note, I am not at all an expert on Open Source
> licenses...
With the current situation I would think that every OSS license
actually works, since your contributions are distributed exactly as
they are submitted, I don't derive anything from them or wrap them up
in “closed” source.
I could however see a potential problem if for example I decide to
offer parser plugins (as opposed to the current declarative system) and
base some default parsers on the syntax definitions currently in the
repository. Then these plugins would be derivative work, so the source
for these would need to be open for some of the OSS licenses, but
worse, I think the GPL would also require that the source of TextMate
be open, if it links with these parsers. The LGPL should however solve
that problem.
More information about the textmate-dev
mailing list