Re: Another Make

[Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>]

Cedric Berger <cedric@wireless-networks.com> writes:

> Beside: If you really want a GPL Ant, there is an easier way to redo
> anything: 
>   - Download Ant source
>   - Rename it Dog
>   - Stick the GPL license on it
>   - Give a few due acknowlegments
>   - That's it.
> 
> This is the beauty of the BSD license.

Er, that is not true for the original BSD license, which *conflicts*
with the GPL, due to the "advertising clause".  The newer BSD license
does not have the advertising clause.  The original Apache license was 
basically the *old* BSD license, *with* the troublesome advertising
clause.  Ant has the Apache 1.1 license, which replaced the advertising
clause with with what I might call a "credit clause":

 * 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, if any, must
 *    include  the following  acknowledgment:  "This product includes  software
 *    developed  by the  Apache Software Foundation  (http://www.apache.org/)."
 *    Alternately, this  acknowledgment may  appear in the software itself,  if
 *    and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear.

This does not have the practical problems of the old BSD license.
However, it is still not clear if it is compatible with the GPL.
I've brought this issue change to RMS's attention.  Perhaps the next revision
of the GPL could make clear that this kind of "credit clause" is ok.

For more information, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html
-- 
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://www.bothner.com/~per/