On 02/02/2011 12:26 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Dave Plater <davejplater@gmail.com> wrote:
Most probably because of this copied from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses Mozilla Public License (MPL)
This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the MPL for this reason.
However, MPL 1.1 has a provision (section 13) that allows a program (or parts of it) to offer a choice of another license as well. If part of a program allows the GNU GPL as an alternate choice, or any other GPL-compatible license as an alternate choice, that part of the program has a GPL-compatible license.
The MPL allows dual licensing whereas the CDDL is uncompromising.
If you continue to stay uninformed, it seems to be impossible to have a license related discussion with you.
Please try to find someone who helps you to understand things....
Jörg
I wasn't going to reply but anyway what is your opinion of this pasted from http://www.fsf.org/licensing Welcome to the FSF Compliance Lab and the home of the GNU General Public License! The Compliance Lab has been an informal activity of the FSF since 1992 and was formalized in December 2001. We handle all licensing-related issues for FSF. We serve the free software community by providing the public with a "knowledge infrastructure" surrounding the GNU GPL and free software licensing, and enforcing the license on FSF-copyrighted software. Are they also talking out the backs of their heads? Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org