[OWASP-FILTERS] Re: license for filters?
ingo at ingostruck.de
Wed Oct 30 18:15:54 EST 2002
> that goes without saying. However, the practical necessities and the goals
> of the project trump politics here.
Well, that's my attitude too. Practical necessities and goals *always*
> > If you are fed up with closed source software, then you should strictly
> > adhere to the GPL (which is my personal favourite).
> that's not a very strong reason.
That's one of the *strongest* reasons for choosing the GPL. :o)
> which is a big strike against IMO. We're looking to raise everyone's boat
> here, not just people we happen to agree with on some licensing issues. The
> GNU project can afford that kind of devisiveness. I'm no so sure we can.
It's a personal decision if you can.
My (personal) intention is definitely *not* to raise "everyone's boat", since
I do not feel obliged to support people who potentially work against one of
my main goals (propagation of *open* source software).
> Licensing concerns were discussed by the various project leaders just over
> a month ago, and the GPL was settled on as a general rule.
Then you can consider this to be primary consensus for all subprojects.
> Licensing for filters is only an issue in that it presents an exception to
> that rule in order to meet our goals.
> A vote is not necessary.
Remember Mark's wise words from the WebScarab "Development Charter":
We are a democracy.
This is a team effort.
No one person owns any one piece of this project.
All code will be released under the GPL.
Wherever possible we will work in teams to share experience, efforts and
talent and so the team is not dependent on any one person."
I think these principles are reasonable and hold for the whole OWASP
So you just can't cut the discussion saying: "A vote is not necessary."
More information about the Owasp-filters