FAQ
I created a new project today at Google Code. I thought it might be pretty
cool to include a 'python software foundation' license option. This would
allow python project developers to choose a license they know will be
compatible with Python core, which may be an important consideration.
Perhaps also Google SoC submissions should use this also?

Cheers,
-T
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/advocacy/attachments/20070321/5fa9f388/attachment.html

Search Discussions

  • Aahz at Mar 21, 2007 at 12:09 am

    On Wed, Mar 21, 2007, Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
    I created a new project today at Google Code. I thought it might be pretty
    cool to include a 'python software foundation' license option. This would
    allow python project developers to choose a license they know will be
    compatible with Python core, which may be an important consideration.
    Perhaps also Google SoC submissions should use this also?
    No:
    http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/
    --
    Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

    "Typing is cheap. Thinking is expensive." --Roy Smith
  • Stephan Deibel at Mar 21, 2007 at 1:02 am

    Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
    I created a new project today at Google Code. I thought it might be
    pretty cool to include a 'python software foundation' license option.
    This would allow python project developers to choose a license they know
    will be compatible with Python core, which may be an important
    consideration. Perhaps also Google SoC submissions should use this also?
    If there are going to be multiple developers on the project, and
    there is a chance of adding the code to the standard library,
    then license choice is an issue. Otherwise, it doesn't matter
    as far as the PSF is concerned.

    This may be a bit off topic for this list, but on the other hand
    it's pretty important that our advocates understand Python's
    licensing. So here are the key points if you want to facilitate
    getting something into the standard library at some point in
    the future:

    * Get PSF contribution forms from all authors, or make sure you
    keep in contact with them so a form can be obtained later.
    If code exists for which no form can be obtained, that would
    block getting that module into the standard library.

    * Use Academic Free License v. 2.1 or Apache License, Version 2.0
    from the start if you don't want to have to change licenses
    to contribute. Changing licenses is best avoided.

    * For many things, the chances of going into the standard library
    are slim. However, it may still reduce the overall licensing
    horrors of any future/mythical sumo distribution what does
    contain your module.

    * Be sure you understand the implications before using the GPL.
    For any library, using the GPL will greatly reduce your
    potential contributor/user base. The LGPL is OK in most cases.
    Of course there are perfectly valid reasons to use the GPL,
    just don't make it your default blindly.

    See also:

    http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq

    - Stephan
  • Tennessee Leeuwenburg at Mar 21, 2007 at 1:43 am
    Thanks for that response, Stephan.

    I suppose I had in mind projects like cdat which effectively redistribute
    Python. Developers /may/ wish to develop applications, and /may/ wish to
    distribute a python binary with their module already installed.

    If they were to do such a thing, they might need to be aware of licensing
    issues.

    Cheers,
    -T
    On 3/21/07, Stephan Deibel wrote:

    Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
    I created a new project today at Google Code. I thought it might be
    pretty cool to include a 'python software foundation' license option.
    This would allow python project developers to choose a license they know
    will be compatible with Python core, which may be an important
    consideration. Perhaps also Google SoC submissions should use this also?
    If there are going to be multiple developers on the project, and
    there is a chance of adding the code to the standard library,
    then license choice is an issue. Otherwise, it doesn't matter
    as far as the PSF is concerned.

    This may be a bit off topic for this list, but on the other hand
    it's pretty important that our advocates understand Python's
    licensing. So here are the key points if you want to facilitate
    getting something into the standard library at some point in
    the future:

    * Get PSF contribution forms from all authors, or make sure you
    keep in contact with them so a form can be obtained later.
    If code exists for which no form can be obtained, that would
    block getting that module into the standard library.

    * Use Academic Free License v. 2.1 or Apache License, Version 2.0
    from the start if you don't want to have to change licenses
    to contribute. Changing licenses is best avoided.

    * For many things, the chances of going into the standard library
    are slim. However, it may still reduce the overall licensing
    horrors of any future/mythical sumo distribution what does
    contain your module.

    * Be sure you understand the implications before using the GPL.
    For any library, using the GPL will greatly reduce your
    potential contributor/user base. The LGPL is OK in most cases.
    Of course there are perfectly valid reasons to use the GPL,
    just don't make it your default blindly.

    See also:

    http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq

    - Stephan
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/advocacy/attachments/20070321/d7472338/attachment.htm
  • Laura Creighton at Mar 21, 2007 at 6:48 am
    In a message of Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:43:09 +1100, "Tennessee Leeuwenburg" writes
    I created a new project today at Google Code. I thought it might be pretty
    cool to include a 'python software foundation' license option. This would
    allow python project developers to choose a license they know will be
    compatible with Python core, which may be an important consideration.
    Perhaps also Google SoC submissions should use this also?

    Cheers,
    -T
    Please remove this. The PSF does not accept submissions under the PSF
    license into the Python core. see: http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq
    for why developers for whom this is an important consideration should use
    the Academic Free License or the Apachee 2.0 license instead.

    Laura Creighton

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupadvocacy @
categoriespython
postedMar 20, '07 at 11:43p
activeMar 21, '07 at 6:48a
posts5
users4
websitepython.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2019 Grokbase