Re: [iPAQ] Squeak on iPAQ :-)

On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Michael Houghton wrote:

> On 31/1/01 8:36 pm, Jay Carlson (nop@place.org) wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> >>> Both Java and Smalltalk are VM-based. The differences I see are mainly
> >>> specific to the Squeak implementation:
> >>> - Squeak is entirely open source, including the VM.
> >>
> >> You have that backwards. Squeak is weird closed with source licensed,
> >
> > As far as I can tell, Squeak's license fits the OSD once you remove
> > Apple's fonts from the image. IANAL, IANOSI. If you can point to
> > something that breaks the OSD in it, please lemme know.
>
> The points from the OSD that I think might be at issue as in
> (http://www.opensource.org/osd.html)
>
> 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups.
[...]
> 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor.
[...]
> 7. Distribution of License.
[...]

> > The Squeak license's language is unfamiliar, sure. But the community
> > understanding is that the Squeak license operates as the MPL for an
> > environment where files don't make sense.
>
> This is not to say that I think these are impossible to overcome, but I
> think they should be addressed, if we're going to keep ourselves honest.

I wrote a bunch of random stuff about 5,6,7 and then deleted it all,
cos I'm outta my depth at this level of detail. Maybe it's time to
send this over to license-discuss@opensource.org and let them help us
figure it out?

Jay
Received on Wed Jan 31 19:38:51 2001