Python, Perl Rewrites: Alliance?

[joneshenry at my-deja.com]

My reading of Guido van Rossum's postings seems to be saying that
it isn't clear whether CNRI, the owner of the copyright of Python
produced while Guido was at CNRI, considers the "license" of
say Python 1.5.2 to be legally valid.

The only solution to preserving the BSDish freedom claimed for
Python 1.5.2's source code would seem to be to start from a code
base totally unaffiliated with CNRI.  Of course this would be an
unthinkable undertaking starting from scratch...or would it?

My first question would be whether CNRI also claims in effect
the trademark for the Python language as well as the copyright
for the current source code.  Would someone be able to write
a Python compatible language from scratch and still call it Python
without CNRI's permission?

As to where a new code base might come from, a perhaps mystic
conjunction of circumstances has the Perl community beginning
planning for a rewrite of their code base for Perl 6.  The
obvious objection is that Perl's traditional license has been
somewhat different from Python's:  The code is dual-licensed under
either the GPL or the Artistic License.  But it seems to me that
the very beginning of this Perl effort is the one chance for
some strategic brokering between the leaders of the Python and
Perl communities.  O'Reilly & Associates, ActiveState, various
conferences, somewhere there has to be the opportunity for lines
of communication.

Even without the present difficulties, the Python community
could sure use the resources of say CPAN.  Is it unthinkable
in the future for Python programs to be able to use the same
repository and mirrors?

In my opinion to close the deal with CNRI, BeOpen must not
surrender the right to license underived code under different
licenses, say the perported license of Python 1.5.2.  BeOpen
needs to come away with an unencumbered equivalent of a
specification for the Python language.

Henry Jones


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.