On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:16:03AM -0500, Paul Frields wrote: [re Drupal GPLv2+ policy] > I don't know a reason why a project's requirement for specific free licenses > should be viewed as strong-arming. After all, both parties have something to > gain from the relationship of having code in Drupal's CVS system. Furthermore, > the Drupal project doesn't prohibit an author from multiple licensing of code > (as long as the additional licensing doesn't invalidate the licensing under > GPLv2+, presumably). For instance, jQuery is found in Drupal CVS, which is > dual-licensed MIT/GPLv2. One legitimate criticism one could raise about the Drupal policy is why it doesn't also permit GPLv2+-compatible code (that is not explicitly GPLv2+-licensed) in its repositories. GPL compatibility is a somewhat fragile but important customary doctrine that I'd like to see projects give support to through policies of this sort. However, I see that Drupal has addressed this very issue here: http://drupal.org/node/66113 and the explanation seems quite rational to me, even if not's the policy I'd support if I were involved in the project. - RF _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal