On 14 September 1999, Barry A. Warsaw said:
> Data point: I know that there are a number of companies that have
> embedded JPython in their commercial products. So far I've had zero
> complaints from them on the JPython license.
Just thought I should join the tide of opposition: heck, I *work* for
CNRI and I still don't like the license. I didn't say much about the
new JPython license because a) I trust Barry's judgement, b) it was
certainly an improvement over the old JPython license, and c) I wasn't
especially worried about one part of CNRI (Guido's group) taking JPython
away from another part (the group that Andrew and I are on).
However, that doesn't change the fact that the "new" license is a nasty
piece of legalistic gibberish. Making it the license for Python 1.6
would be a major setback -- while it was better than the old JPython
license, it's a damn sight worse than the old Python license. I have
zero sympathy for the legal beagles here with their narrow corporatist
viewpoint; trying to treat Python as just another potential piece of
intellectual property is wrong-headed in the extreme. The free software
world simply does not work that way.
BTW, I suspect that the companies embedding JPython haven't minded the
license because they come from the Java world, a world that seems to me
to be dominated by corporate pin-headed thinking. The idea of
community, openness, and sharing is utterly alien to these suit-wearing,
smarmy Java frat-boy types, so JPython's licensing terms were probably a
breath of fresh air to them. ("What? No $100,000 source license fee?
Wow!") ("But wait Chip -- it's not BUZZWORD COMPLIANT! I can't find
enough TLAs!!!")
Hmmm, enough flaming Java weenies. Please, don't anybody take the last
paragraphy too seriously or personally...
Greg
--
Greg Ward - software developer gward@cnri.reston.va.us
Corporation for National Research Initiatives
1895 Preston White Drive voice: +1-703-620-8990
Reston, Virginia, USA 20191-5434 fax: +1-703-620-0913