Ya, I will just license the modifications to the specs under EPL. I do feel though specs are a weird grey area. For example, EPL 2.0 says:
> Modified Works shall not include works that contain only declarations, > interfaces, types, classes, structures, or files of the Program solely in > each case in order to link to, bind by name, or subclass the Program or > Modified Works thereof. And EPL 1 allows a contributor to relicense under EPL 2. It doesn't list specs explicitly, because it's clearly designed for Java, but I feel it begs the question: If I implement a function of some spec, and then a spec for it. And someone implement a function of similar spec, and a spec for it. Now the specs could be seen as derivative. It can get tricky. Anyways. That's just thoughts. For my project it don't matter. Thanks -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/clojure/e2164409-8415-428f-b010-072a629dfd8b%40googlegroups.com.
