Hi, Please let me stress this: you can put the license of your choice to your code. Is your right and we ensured it continues being your right by choosing MIT license for Pharo. That means that all frameworks, apps, etc. that runs on Pharo has to be MIT? No! YOU CAN DECIDE.
But then, if it is not MIT, your code will not be considered for inclusion, just that (but many times you do not have that in mind, so who cares). In my own case, if is not MIT (or some permissive license like BSD, Apache, etc.) I will not even look inside it… why? because I do not want to be “infected”: I do not want to have the risk of copying (even innocently) some copyrighted ideas. You do not know the mess that was rewrite entire parts of Pharo to be able to release it… So, in the case of contributions to Pharo, yes… is “our way” (which is not a personal statement, is how this community choose to work). Anyway… of course you can always put the license you want to your code (and that applies to Territorial too). cheers, Esteban ps: and please forgive Stef for being harsh on this… the Spec affaire was painful for us, we do not like to put lawyers and that kind of thing in play… > On 07 Sep 2016, at 14:08, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: > > > > Le 7/9/16 à 13:58, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas a écrit : >> Hi, >> >> >> On 07/09/16 13:39, stepharo wrote: >>> >>>> We should not have "The Pharo Way" (TM) or "No way!"... suddenly Markus >>>> talk about feedback loops comes to mind, particularly the slide on page >>>> 53, regarding "An open source smalltalk ignoring all community >>>> contributions"[2]. This is far for being the case in this community and we >>>> can keep that scenario at safe distance, if we show options. So, dual >>>> license is an option, git is an option, markdown is an option. Pharo as a >>>> place with options is one where Pharo can fulfill its vision for more >>>> people. Let's make these options visible and figure out the way the work >>>> better for a wider community. >>> It is amazing how you like talking. >>> >> >> Yes. I like. Is the way to know unwritten history. Not all the people in the >> community know the details as you do, so talking is the way of going out of >> misconceptions, like mine about dual license or state positions, like why I >> don't use Pillar. The "it has been discussed, this is our way, take or leave >> it" doesn't help in understanding way. So yes, I'm all about encouraging >> dialog/talk if it helps to understand. > > this is why I added the comment on the pharo contribution page. > >> >> Bye, >> >> Offray >> >> > >
