On 2/16/06, Archie Cobbs <archie@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This can make sense if the Harmony tests are Harmony-specific. Some are, some aren't. They plan to have a separation between the two though. So Classpath will be able to use the non-specific part of Harmony's testsuite. > Otherwise I don't see what the point is. The point is that, for whatever reasons (rational or irrational), some people simply won't contribute to a GPL-licensed project. Some of those people are Harmony contributors. If those people want to contribute to a Java testsuite, which they do, it won't be Mauve as long as Mauve is GPL. > There may be no real reason it should be GPL, but in any case it is... > so.. what's the problem with that? I mean, from a practical standpoint. >From a practical standpoint it's deterring a fairly large body of potential contributors... > But you seem also to be asking the religious question "why GPL"? Not at all. I like the GPL. I think the GPL-with-exception license of Classpath is the perfect license for what Classpath does. I use the GPL on almost all my own code (although I prefer the LGPL for things that are designed to be used as libraries). Even RMS points out that using non-copyleft licenses can be beneficial when it's a net gain for Free Software as a whole (eg Ogg). And in this case I think there is such a gain, because the GPL is buying us nothing (since there's no practical reason why anyone would *want* to take Mauve proprietary) but costing us contributors. I seem to be in a minority though, so I'll drop the issue I guess. Stuart. -- http://sab39.dev.netreach.com/
