[M3devel] On the way to release other packages in GPL?

[Darko Volaric]

Wait, there is a serious move toward releasing under GPL?   Or have I misunderstood this email.


> On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:30 PM, mika at async.caltech.edu wrote:
> 
> 
> Is there some consensus on what precisely needs to be extracted in terms
> of a release?  The Linux discussion earlier on this list made no sense
> to me, it almost sounded like someone was wilfully misinterpreting the
> plain English of the legalese.
> 
> Also who is/has been the best lead so far?  I can see if I can find
> someone through various connections...
> 
>    Mika
> 
> Hendrik Boom writes:
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 05:27:16PM +0000, Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. wro=
>> te:
>>> Hello:I fear most viable way to keep te language alive is to GPL it . Soo=
>> n we wont have the resortes to keep alive. Im not understimating anyone her=
>> e. But IMHO is de time to do it.=A0Thanks in advance
>> 
>> Any GPL-compatible license will work.  Even MIT.  Possibly even the =
>> 
>> so-called Creative Commons variation on public domain, which is =
>> 
>> meaningful in jurisdictions without a concept of public domain.
>> 
>> The hard part is liberating the parts of the system that are currently =
>> 
>> inder the existing Modula 3 license.  They will have to be replaced if =
>> 
>> we can't get the copyright owner to respond usefully.
>> 
>> And that's a lot of work.
>> 
>> -- hendrik
>> _______________________________________________
>> M3devel mailing list
>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
> _______________________________________________
> M3devel mailing list
> M3devel at elegosoft.com
> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel