On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:43:57PM -0400, Christopher Armstrong wrote:
Well, I was focusing on his "what's the difference", which I can't answer. I guess I'll risk it: The rationale is that MIT (presumably) allows people to derive from the work without keeping derived works open, and that's what glyph wanted now that Twisted has matured. Also, the Twisted codebase is (presumably) not at the whim of glyph any more, since all contributors (if they want) are listed as copyright holders, not just glyph.
To be clear on this: contributions are now *only* copyright their authors, (rather than the previous joint copyright-assignment to glyph)? And so when you say "copyright holders", you're referring to everyone that has copyright in any part of Twisted's source, rather than saying that everyone is now joint holders of copyright? Also, the new source file boilerplate says: # Copyright (c) 2001-2004 Twisted Matrix Laboratories. # See LICENSE for details. But as far as I know, Twisted Matrix Laboratories isn't a legally recognised organisation (in any country), and regardless it isn't mentioned in the LICENSE file, despite the boilerplate's promise that it would have details. This is probably a minor issue, but it is confusing. -Andrew.