[darcs-users] darcs patch: Note first batch of openssl license exceptions granted.

[zooko]

On Jun 5, 2008, at 8:24 AM, E.Y.Kow at brighton.ac.uk wrote:

> Hmm... David isn't too happy with the Eclipse part.
>
> I personally don't care either way, so it may be up to Zooko to
> open this debate.

I personally don't use Eclipse (I use Emacs), but I know that a lot  
of other people do, and I know that there is a darcs eclipse  
integration project [1], and that there are "Eclipse distributions"  
which are packages containing Eclipse with various extensions and  
plugins [2].

Having the Eclipse licence included in the set of licences which can  
cover source code legitimately combined with darcs would remove one  
potential roadblock from anyone who in the future wants to include  
darcs in an "Eclipse distribution".

David didn't mention what specifically he didn't like about the  
Eclipse licence, so I can't comment on that.  I know that it is  
approved by OSI as an "Open Source licence" [3] and by FSF as a (GPL- 
incompatible) "Free Software licence" [4].  More general information  
about it can be found on wikipedia: [5].

Regards,

Zooko

[1] http://eclipsedarcs.org/doku.php
[2] http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-eclipse- 
dist/
[3] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php
[4] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_Public_License