[Coin-discuss] Any updates on COIN-OR GPL compatible licensing?

[Soeren Sonnenburg]

On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 13:34 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 19:08 +0200, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 11:26 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> > > Soeren-
> > > 
> > > Sorry I haven't been able to respond sooner, but as you've seen from
> > > Robin's post to coin-discuss, there has been some movement afoot on the
> > > license front.  Whether that movement represents progress on the
> > > compatibility/dual-licensing issues isn't yet clear, but there wasn't
> > > much that we were in a position to do once this process started.
> > > 
> > > Now that this part is complete, we will be looking at this and related
> > > issue again.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, it looks like EPL is still a GPL incompatible license. So
> > it seems it does not help in the case of coinor...
> 
> No, but there is a new license steward.  So as far as future
> developments in this area, we'd now have to raise the question with the
> Eclipse Foundation rather than with IBM.

I don't think it is likely that we will see the EPL become GPL
compatible...

> Dual licensing is a different issue, as it involves the owners of the
> various pieces of code.

It would be much more easy to dual license coin-or. Having written the
debian/copyright files there are very few copyright holders apart from
IBM so it would be easy if you get the "go" from IBM.

Soeren
-- 
For the one fact about the future of which we can be certain is that it
will be utterly fantastic. -- Arthur C. Clarke, 1962
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://list.coin-or.org/pipermail/coin-discuss/attachments/20090418/0212c9d3/attachment.sig>