Not really sure why EPL is a hindrance in this scenario? Doesn’t EPL allow for this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Content-filter at
foundation.eclipse.org [mailto:
postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Gustavo Eliano
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 20, 2009 3:51 PM
*To:* Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
*Subject:* Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Release parts of MTJ in a permissive license
the main idea here is to make it easier for some one to create its own importer. since the UEI importer is the most complext one it provide a lot of good ideas and good code to do that. if this plugin is released as EDL it would be easier for any company to use its code (or parts of the code)
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Gorkem Ercan <
gercan@xxxxxxx <mailto:
gercan@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
How does EPL hinder the further enhancing of the UEI importer?
--
Gorkem
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Gustavo Eliano <
gustavo.eliano@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:
gustavo.eliano@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi MTJ,
we had some discussion in todays call about releasing some parts
of MTJ in a permissive license. This would make it easier for
anyone to extend MTJ. Since this year, the Eclipse foundation
already accept to distribute example plugins as EDL (Eclipse
Distribution License). This is a BSD-like license, This link
<http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mike/2009/05/21/some-new-license-flexibility/>
have some details about that.
the initial proposal that came in the call was to have:
- release all examples both as EPL and EDL
- release the UEI importer both as EPL and EDL (still need to both
check if this is possible since it is not an example)
i really like this idea, but i would like to get a feedback from
eveyone on the list to see if this make sense or not.
:)
gep
_______________________________________________
dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>