RE: Lua License

["Eric Ries" <eries@...>]

Why don't we just stick with the Lua license? I have noticed that most
Lua-related projects tend to simply use the same license as the Lua
distribution itself, much in the same way that most Perl projects use the
same license as Perl. Although the FSF does not like the Perl (artistic)
license much, they agree that having consistency within the community is a
Very Good Thing. Further, because Perl is licensed under the GPL and the
Artistic license, it is deemed Officially GPL Compatible but without
preventing closed-source forks (which can still happen under the Artistic
license).

So, if we are planning to change the license, perhaps we could continue to
license Lua under the "Lua license" as well as whatever new license we
choose. Oh, and I like LGPL for VisLua, incidentally. It means that you can
include VisLua as a component in your closed-source application, but you
cannot redistribute a closed-source modified version of VisLua as a
standalone app. Only modifications to VisLua itself need be made public.

Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br
> [mailto:owner-lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br]On Behalf Of Roberto
> Ierusalimschy
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:47 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: Lua License
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, John Belmonte wrote:
>
> > I guess this is the right time to just come out and ask... is it not
> > possible to re-release Lua under the "new BSD" or similar license?
>
> We will discuss that (it may take a while...). But I still have a
> question:
> what about the licence's licence? That is, to copy someone else's
> copyright notice do we have to include something like "this
> copyright notice
> is copyrighted by ..."?  ;-)
>
> -- Roberto
>