On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Georg S. Weber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hello Sage team,
>
> great work so far, keep pushing forward!
> I've got the following question:
>
>
> Does a new SPKG, whose contents are licensed under GPLv3+ ("three
> plus"),
> fulfil your license requirement in order to become part of the Sage
> core?No it does not. However, we intend to revisit this question -- by a vote of the JSAGE editorial board -- every few months, and it is very likely that at some point we will allow GPLv3+ code in the core. But right now new GPLv3+ code will not be added to the core of Sage. Do you have a specific project in mind? -- William > > In your Wiki (http://www.sagemath.org:9001/spkg/InclusionProcedure? > highlight=%28SPKG%29) > you say "GPL version 2+ compatible license.", regarding e.g. JSAGE you > say > (http://www.sagemath.org/jsage/guidelines.html): > "License: All software that is published in JSAGE must be licensed > under > a "GPL v2 or later"-compatible license.". > > By "GPLv3+" I mean licensed using the usual catchphrase: > "The xyzprog is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or > (at your option) any later version.", > referring to the "GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007". > (And analogously "GPLv2+", referring to GPL "Version 2, June 1991"; > LGPL is the "Lesser" version of a GPL licence.) > > GPLv3+ is more restrictive than GPLv2+, both in theory and in > practice, > so my question above is not so innocent as it might seem at first. > > Parts of the current SAGE v3.0.2 are licensed (L)GPLv3+, and there is > the SAGE motto: > > "Building the car instead of reinventing the wheel". > > This would lead to a strong assumption that the answer to my question > above is "Yes" anyway. > > However, the fine distinction between (L)GPLv2+ and (L)GPLv3+ was > one of the keypoints in the recent (ongoing?) generation-conflict > flamewar > on the mailing-list "gmp-discuss", an outtake from the middle of which > was posted in the Sage Project Blog > (see "http://planet.sagemath.org/";, entry from May 29th). > > I do not want to discuss this here, I just want clarity > about the Sage team's policy regarding the future inclusion of > GPLv3+'ed code into the mainline Sage core. > (Say explicitly extending ".../sage/modular/modsym/"). > > If there's a quick answer, good. > (I might have been missing something, please just tell me, thanks!) > If your answer takes some time, that's OK for me, too. > > > Zum Wohl! > gsw > > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
