Python license (was RE: Python plug-ins for Adobe Products available)

[Tim Peters]

[Grant Munsey, author of some cool Python plug-ins for Adobe
 products, available from
    http://opensource.adobe.com/
]

>  ... it wasn't exactly easy to convince Adobe that they should have
> an open source site. I'm hoping it will grow as time goes on.

Same here!

> ...
> I said the license is liberal because I'm happy it turned out that
> way ...

I'm assuming this refers to the "Adobe Open Source license", at

    http://opensource.adobe.com/misc/aoslic.shtml

> lot of time with corporate lawyers, etc.

Productive, isn't it <wink>?

> ...
> I wrote the plug-ins for the Adobe products because I wanted them.
>
> I made them available because some people were interested and I
> thought that some others might be as well.

All firmly in the tradition that Open Source grew from.  Hats off!  It's
nice to share <smile>.

> ...
> What really worries me is the wrangling over the Python license ...
> one of the reasons I went for Python in a big way was the non
> restrictive license.

The wrangling itself is a good sign:  it means that we (BeOpen PythonLabs)
have been opposing more restrictions.  CNRI already changed their license to
the extent that the board of the Open Source Initiative voted to certify it
as Open Source compliant (see definition at

    http://www.opensource.org/osd.html

).  We also want Python to remain GPL-*compatible*, and CNRI has changed
some of the language in response to Richard Stallman's objections.  There is
still one clause RMS objects to, and that *may* be resolved as early as
tomorrow (Monday) -- stay tuned.  Without a lawyer whispering in my ear, I
really can't say whether the CNRI license is as friendly to proprietary use
as was the CWI license, but I can't really tell about the Adobe license in
that respect either:  the text of neither is plain English (e.g., it's nice
to be told I have a license to "publicly perform" your plug-ins, but if that
means something other than that I can read their source code aloud at a
beatnik bar, it's beyond me <wink>; the CNRI license has similar
abracadabra).

The CNRI license is actually shorter than Adobe's at this point, so that
should be good news.  While I am indeed not sure what its language means in
all cases, I *believe* all segments of the Python community will find it
acceptable in the end!  Unfortunately, because it's CNRI's license we can't
yet show you the text so you can decide for yourself.

Also because it's CNRI's license, people with questions about it are going
to have to ask CNRI for answers (if they go beyond whether the OSI has
certified it and whether RMS says it is or isn't GPL-compatible -- those are
plain facts we can pass on once we know the answers ourselves; but beyond
that, we'll be developing Python as a CNRI licensee, in the same boat as
you).

There is also (according to CNRI) a possibility that CNRI may re-release
JPython under the new Python license.  I believe that would be cause for
major rejoicing in the JPython world (JPython was never released under a
license as friendly as the CPython license).

So don't worry *too* much!  BeOpen PythonLabs is optimistic at this point.

even-guido-has-broken-his-perpetual-scowl<wink>-ly y'rs  - tim