How JGit changed from GPLv2 to BSD/EPL

[Benoit Boissinot]

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 06:00:43AM -0700, rupert.thurner wrote:
> On 30 Sep., 19:50, Matt Mackall <m... at selenic.com> wrote:
> >
> > Alright, this is going to be the last I have to say on the subject of
> > licenses for a while. Read it carefully, folks:
> >
> > Copyright law aside, I do not want to see a clone of Mercurial licensed
> > under a weak copyleft (eg EPL) that allows proprietary extensions to be
> > added and users to get locked into them. Not only would that go against
> > everything I set out to do in creating a free DVCS in the first place,
> > it would create a compatibility nightmare for users and developers. I
> > will have a very dim view indeed of anyone who helps bring such a
> > situation about, especially if their rationale is as flimsy as "I needed
> > to call Mercurial internals directly from Java." Because frankly, no,
> > you don't[1].
> 
> seems that really happens, as an example with mercurialeclipse which
> now gets extensions in the hgeclipse project like
> http://javaforge.com/scmShowFileRevision?proj_id=2828&filename=test%2fcom%2fvectrace%2fMercurialEclipse%2fcommands%2fHgTagClientTests.java&revision=1407&date=Fri+Oct+30+23%3a06%3a00+UTC+2009
> 
> saying:
> This software is the confidential and proprietary information of ...
> shall not disclose such Confidential Information and shall use ...

This isn't an extension, just some tests. And afaict, MercurialEclipse is
only a wrapper around the command line, it doesn't expose internals.

(please don't start the licensing thread again)

Cheers,

Benoit
-- 
:wq