[python-advocacy] [OT?] Creating a PSF license option for Google Code

[Tennessee Leeuwenburg]

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 <sdeibel at wingware.com> 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