3 ms·

That's not going to fly if someone gets testy. Perhaps they should have talked to a project that's done it before like the Squeak folks. They really had to kn

That's not going to fly if someone gets testy. Perhaps they should have talked to a project that's done it before like the Squeak folks. They really had to know how the OpenBSD contributors would react to the Apache license.

throwaway91111 10y ago
Someone might object. Perhaps this is the fastest route forward (i.e. directly asking for concerns).
- BucketSort 10y ago
  I'm not sure.
cdegroot 10y ago
Squeak guy here - I did a lot of prodding around the relicensing and it was pretty much the same situation. An old code base and a license that was "open source" at heart but had problematic language. It's impossible to reach everybody - Squeak has code going back to 1978 I think :-). We got the thumbs up from the main contributors (Kay and friends - in fact, I think it was Alan who started pushing for this), we got the thumbs up from Apple (that took a while but they were very cooperative and nice), we decided that Disney didn't own any of the code (that was a big relief ;-)), and then when we didn't get any objections from major contributors we went ahead and hoped for the best. Law is not mathematics, it's a human endeavour and that makes the application of the rules, however precise they're written, often more messy than we techies are comfortable with. 90% of my encounters with legal stuff is "what are the trade-offs". Ditto here - you trade off the burden of having a shitty license against the vanishingly small risk that some contributor will want to retract its code and live with the decision - if you can show you did your due diligence the impact should be low.