Active State and the PSF

[Tim Peters]

[Thomas Wouters]
> ...
> I'd like to point out that the Python licence is an Open Source licence,
> as well as a GPL compatible licence (as per Python 2.0.1, 2.1.1 and/or
> 2.2, whichever comes first.)

[Carel Fellinger]
> Definitely GPL compatible in the near future?

Multiply the probabilities attached to "definitely" and "near future" and I
don't think better than "probably" is justified.  CNRI's lawyers maintained
the license was always GPL-compatible, and as a matter of law that
disagreement was never resolved.  The difference now is that the board of
the PSF agreed to license changes that the FSF said will be enough that they
too will agree the license is GPL-compatible.  So that part looks solid
now -- still, other people *thought* they had agreement on this before, so
IMO it's not certain until it's history.  "Near future" is less certain,
since no release date has even been announced yet for any of 2.0.1, 2.1.1 or
2.2.

> That's certainly good news!

It certainly has potential to become good news <wink>.