scratch team mailing list archive

[Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:11:18AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> The second question is related. The Squeak v2 image on which Scratch is
> built contains code licensed under the MIT license and the Apache 2.0
> license: <http://www.squeak.org/SqueakLicense/>. According to the Apache
> Foundation and the FSF, one can't combine Apache 2.0 and GPL v2 into a
> redistributable binary. However, Apache 2.0 + GPL v3 can yield a thing where
> the whole shebang is GPL v3.

In case the problem isn't clear, this is from the GPLv2:

   These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable
   sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be
   reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then
   this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you
   distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same
   sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the
   distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose
   permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to
   each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

   Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
   your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
   exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
   collective works based on the Program.

In other words, I don't think we can distribute the whole Scratch.image
other than under the GPLv2 (even though the Squeak parts of it clearly are
independent and separate works). But since the GPLv2 and Apache 2.0 licenses
can't be mixed, we're stymied. (They're both open source / free software
licenses, but the APL 2.0 has patent protection clauses which make them
incompatible.)

*If* the GPLv3 can be applied instead, there's no problem. But, as I said,
the README is ambiguous -- and associated documentation, like that at
<http://info.scratch.mit.edu/GPLv2_Licensed_Scratch_Code>, seems pretty
clearly GPLv2 specific.

How can we get this resolved so we can distribute Scratch in Fedora?

If this list isn't the right place to discuss this, please let me know what
the right place is. Thanks.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx          <http://mattdm.org/>