From Fernando.Perez at colorado.edu Fri Oct 1 14:14:06 2004 From: Fernando.Perez at colorado.edu (Fernando Perez) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 12:14:06 -0600 Subject: [IPython-dev] IPython license switch: LGPL -> BSD Message-ID: <415D9E6E.4020604@colorado.edu> Hi all, if you are getting this email and you are NOT on the ipython user/dev lists, it is because I have your name on the credits list for IPython (http://ipython.scipy.org). This means you may have contributed code, ideas, bugfixes, or some other form of help to iypthon in the past. I'm not trying to spam you, really :) I'd like to let everybody know that for the next release (0.6.4, most likely) I plan on switching licenses for ipython from LGPL to BSD. The reason behind this switch is to enable smoother integration with Scipy (http://www.scipy.org) and matplotlib (http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net). In order to spread further the use of python for scientific use, we want to provide a set of tools which is as well integrated and easy to use as possible for scientists who are not necessarily python experts. Scipy is BSD[1] licensed and matplotlib uses a PSF-type license[2], but up to this point ipython has been LGPL[3], so it makes code integration a problem. I wish to change this. I have already contacted the other two core authors of ipython's code, and they are OK with the switch. Additionally, ipython distributes (unmodified) Bill Bumgarner's DPyGetOpt and Ka-Ping Yee's Itpl, but these modules are MIT[4] licensed, so there is no problem there either. I will leave those modules as they are today. I am giving this public heads up in case any of you has contributed _code_ to ipython in the past, and disagrees with this license change. I would regret such a situation, and resolving it would be very time-consuming, as I haven't tracked individual patches with names carefully. So I'd have to dig through CVS quite a bit to remove and rewrite third-party contributions which don't want to be part of a BSD-released IPython. But if anyone has very strong objections on this matter, please point me to the code you've sent me in the past, and I'll do my best to excise it from ipython and rewrite the necessary functionality myself from scratch. Please note that I am NOT soliciting feedback on this decision, nor am I proposing a discussion on licenses. This decision is made and final. So unless you: 1. have sent me code for ipython in the past, AND 2. object to such code being distributed under a BSD license, you can safely ignore this message. I will wait for 2 weeks from today, and if I hear no replies otherwise I'll consider all current code in ipython OK for BSD relicensing (except for the above mentioned MIT-licensed code, which will remain unchanged). Best regards to all, and sorry for the unsolicited message. Fernando. REFERENCES [1] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php, see also http://www.scipy.org/About/FAQ.html#license [2] http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/license.html [3] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/lgpl-license.php, see also http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html [4] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php From vivainio at kolumbus.fi Sat Oct 2 09:17:40 2004 From: vivainio at kolumbus.fi (Ville Vainio) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 16:17:40 +0300 Subject: [IPython-dev] IPython license switch: LGPL -> BSD In-Reply-To: <415D9E6E.4020604@colorado.edu> References: <415D9E6E.4020604@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <415EAA74.4050504@kolumbus.fi> Fernando Perez wrote: > the switch. Additionally, ipython distributes (unmodified) Bill > Bumgarner's DPyGetOpt and Ka-Ping Yee's Itpl, but these modules are > MIT[4] licensed, so there is no problem there either. I will leave > those modules as they are today. Why not use the MIT license for the whole ipython? On a c.l.py discussion that took place a while ago, the MIT license was seen as more straightforward and "obviously free" (nothing is free enough to some die-hards) than the BSD license. Or is: """ Neither the name of the nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. """ important to you in some specific manner? > Please note that I am NOT soliciting feedback on this decision, nor am > I proposing a discussion on licenses. This decision is made and > final. So unless you: Oops, I did it already :-). BSD is fine with me. From Fernando.Perez at colorado.edu Sat Oct 2 15:28:29 2004 From: Fernando.Perez at colorado.edu (Fernando Perez) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 13:28:29 -0600 Subject: [IPython-dev] IPython license switch: LGPL -> BSD In-Reply-To: <415EAA74.4050504@kolumbus.fi> References: <415D9E6E.4020604@colorado.edu> <415EAA74.4050504@kolumbus.fi> Message-ID: <415F015D.4000201@colorado.edu> Ville Vainio wrote: > Why not use the MIT license for the whole ipython? On a c.l.py > discussion that took place a while ago, the MIT license was seen as more > straightforward and "obviously free" (nothing is free enough to some > die-hards) than the BSD license. > > Or is: > """ > Neither the name of the nor the names of its contributors > may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software > without specific prior written permission. > """ > > important to you in some specific manner? Well, that clause isn't what's in my mind. Rather, a. scipy is BSD, so I'm happy just going with what they have. I know MIT and BSD are very compatible, but in the future I think ipython and scipy are going to grow closer together, so the simpler the better. I don't want to spend even 5 seconds of our time thinking we need to relicense anything to mix code. If we all use the same license, we're good to go from day 1. b. I already contacted the core authors about BSD, sent emails saying BSD, etc. I really don't want to spend one more minute than absolutely necessary on this, so I'm not going to repeat that dance. BSD stays. Best, f