On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I believe the text of the license and forms we use is quite uncontroversial; these very same words have been used for JPython for quite a while. The words are all on the web:
Actually, I don't like them all that much :-( [I don't recall any specific discussion about it, but I may have missed it and/or simply because I've never used JPython.] The BSD-ish license that Python has always used is much more preferable. I dislike the regulation of the "Python" name, the requirement to prominently discuss modifications made, and the revocation clause. I might find other items, but that is from a quick read using Lynx on a tiny monitor... Heck, how could people like PPSI, PythonWare, or D.C. truely like that license? Each of those companies uses "Python" significantly in their marketing and their business. I can certainly state that PPSI will never do anything in an official capacity to recognize that license. [there is a separate issue of whether "Python" can be trademarked, but the license does use the term "trade name" which could easily be argued to include the term "Python" and thus subject the name to the license.]
If you *did* contribute code to Python, however, I'd love it if you saved me some work and filled out the wet signature form and mailed it to me at the given address.
No problem. Future contributions and agreemend to abide by that license are a different issue. It doesn't have the "feels good" feeling that the old license does. I'm not sure that bodes well, and it doesn't sit well with me at the moment. Regards, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/