<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi,<br>
      The poll winner was GPLv3 but the poll was "non-binding", i.e. the
      community can't force contributors to switch licenses and nobody
      sent a patch to change license notices.<br>
      <br>
      I and other members of the community think it's important to
      support freedom by using copyleft, therefore most of our
      contributions are using GPLv3. <br>
      <br>
      I checked and it turns out Apache 2.0 license is compatible with
      GPLv3 (but incompatible with GPLv2):<br>
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2</a><br>
      <br>
      Regards,<br>
      Sebastian<br>
      <br>
      El 07/06/13 19:38, Daniel Narvaez escribió:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CANTHhvZaDdfF5Arz0W6xnVy_-QrG_9P+B_0+fEcGK3-MBasBgw@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">I'm actually a bit confused about the result of the
      one year ago discussion. I thought we decided to stay with gplv2
      but the poll winner seems to be gplv3?
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Anyway even on gplv3 I think the situation is pretty
        different if nothing else<span></span> because one of
        major goals of the web activities work is to bring activities on
        devices where tivoization might be an issue.<br>
        <br>
        On Saturday, 8 June 2013, Daniel Narvaez wrote:<br>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
          .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yes I think
          it's very <span></span>different because using GPLv2 would
          mean we can't use Apache licensed libraries, which are a big
          percentage of available js libraries.<br>
          <br>
          On Saturday, 8 June 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div dir="ltr">We already had this discussion two years ago,
              <div>is the situation with the javascript activities
                different to need </div>
              <div>start this discussion again?</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>Gonzalo</div>
              <div>
                <pre style="white-space:pre-wrap">On 06/14/2011 05:42 PM, Luke Faraone wrote:
> This is a vote to determine the suggested <span>license</span> for future releases
> of <span>Sugar</span>. This poll will run from right now until Wed Jun 29 2011 at 
> midnight UTC-4.

Sorry for the late update; the reporting mechanism for our voting
software temporarily broke.

Summary: the winner was **GNU GPL version 3, or any later version**.

## Results Details ##

55 out of 217 eligible members voted, or a little more than Â&frac14;.

The full results of this election ranked the candidates in order of
preference (from most preferred to least preferred):

 1. GNU GPL version 3, or any later version
 2. GNU GPL version 2, or any later version
 3. Don't know or don't care


Each number in the table below shows how many times the candidate on the
left beat the matching candidate on the top. The winner is on the top of
the left column.
        v3      v2      DC
v3      --      34      37
v2      21      --      42
DC      18      13      --

Based on a sheer count of 1st place votes, v3 received 49% of the vote,
v2 received 29% of the vote, and the apathetic position received the
remaining 22% of the vote.

Full details (and alternative election method calculations) are visible
at the Selectricity page linked in the original voting ticket email.

Thanks,

Luke Faraone
<span>Sugar</span> Labs, Systems
✉: <a moz-do-not-send="true">luke@sugarlabs.org</a>
I: lfaraone on <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://irc.freenode.net/" target="_blank">irc.freenode.net</a>

</pre>
              </div>
            </div>
            <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
              <br>
              <div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:59 PM,
                Daniel Narvaez <span dir="ltr"><<a
                    moz-do-not-send="true">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>></span>
                wrote:<br>
                <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                  .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Well
                  permission to double license really.
                  <div>
                    <div><span></span><br>
                      <br>
                      On Saturday, 8 June 2013, Daniel Narvaez wrote:<br>
                      <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0
                        .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
                        solid;padding-left:1ex">Ugh one issue with
                        Apache is that I think we would need to get
                        permission to relicense the svg icons under
                        apache from all the people that contributed to
                        them. Do you think that will be possible?
                        <div>
                          <br>
                        </div>
                        <div>People that contributed but doesn't seem to
                          be involved with the project anymore.</div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>Eben Eliason</div>
                        <div>Marco Pesenti Gritti</div>
                        <div>Tomeu Vizoso<span></span></div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>Still around</div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>Scott Ananian</div>
                        benzea
                        <div>erikos</div>
                        <div>Martin Abente</div>
                        <div>Walter Bender</div>
                        <div>godiard</div>
                        <div>Manuel Quinones</div>
                        <div><br>
                          <div>From the git log of the icons dir.<br>
                            <br>
                            On Saturday, 8 June 2013, Daniel Narvaez
                            wrote:<br>
                            <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0
                              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
                              solid;padding-left:1ex">
                              I'm still undecided really but since it's
                              important to make a call soon, my vote
                              goes for Apache, both for sugar-web and
                              for activities we develop.<span></span><br>
                              <br>
                              On Saturday, 8 June 2013, Daniel Narvaez
                              wrote:<br>
                              <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0
                                .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
                                solid;padding-left:1ex"><font><span
                                    style="line-height:normal;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">We
                                    really need to make a call here, we
                                    start to have a sizeable amount of
                                    code and the first release is near.
                                    I tend to think gplv2 is not an
                                    option because of the apache
                                    incompatibility. I would go for
                                    Apache if we want to avoid issues
                                    with anti-tivoization, otherwise
                                    gplv3.</span></font><br>
                                <br>
                                To point out a concrete problem we could
                                have with gpl3... My understanding is
                                that you could not ship an activity
                                based on sugar-web in the apple store,
                                at least including the lib locally. I
                                suppose it would be fine if you loaded
                                it from a server, but then you
                                need security restrictions if you
                                implement any kind of system
                                integration.<span></span><br>
                                <br>
                                On Friday, 3 May 2013, Daniel Narvaez
                                wrote:<br>
                                <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0
                                  .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
                                  solid;padding-left:1ex">
                                  <div dir="ltr">
                                    <div>Hello,<br>
                                      <br>
                                      we need to decide how to license
                                      the new javascript libraries. I am
                                      mostly clueless about the topic
                                      and I'm honestly scared to start
                                      this thread, please be gentle :)<br>
                                      <br>
                                    </div>
                                    Following is the rationale I came up
                                    with for Agora. I think it probably
                                    applies to the sugar-html libraries
                                    too. Feedback would be very welcome
                                    as we are no expert.<br>
                                    <br>
                                    ---<br>
                                    <br>
                                    I spent some time trying to decide
                                    which license is better for the
                                    various part of Agora. It's an hard
                                    and important decision, I'm not a
                                    lawyer and not even an expert but we
                                    need to make a call. My
                                    understanding is that a license is
                                    better than nothing.<br>
                                    <br>
                                    (L)GPLv2<br>
                                    <br>
                                    * Copyleft. Requires all the
                                    modifications to be made freely
                                    available.<br>
                                    * Incompatible with Apache. Pretty
                                    bad, a lot of code already licensed
                                    that way and growing fast
                                    (especially in the javascript
                                    world).<br>
                                    <br>
                                    (L)GPLv3<br>
                                    <br>
                                    * Copyleft<br>
                                    * Compatiible with Apache.<br>
                                    * Anti-tivoization clause. Mixed
                                    bag, would it prevent us to run on
                                    hardware we are interested in? One
                                    problematic case I can think of is
                                    distributing an activity through the
                                    Apple store. We wouldn't be able to
                                    do that. Though people could still
                                    install the activity as a web app,
                                    from the browser. Maybe that's good
                                    enough?<br>
                                    * Latest version. Better wording
                                    etc. Patents protection.<br>
                                    * We can distribute the sugar icons
                                    under LGPLv3, without requiring any
                                    relicensing, because of the "or
                                    later" clause.<br>
                                    * My understanding is that if xi-*
                                    is LGPL, proprietary applications
                                    could still use it without making
                                    modifications. The situation is not
                                    as clear as for the traditional
                                    linked libraries case but from <a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html"
                                      target="_blank">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html</a>
                                    I'd think we are fine.<br>
                                    <br>
                                    Apache<br>
                                    <br>
                                    * Non copyleft. It would be more
                                    friendly to companies that might
                                    want to reuse code in their
                                    products. But is that likely to
                                    happen? Both xi and omega are pretty
                                    agora specific. Still I think it's a
                                    good license to use for more generic
                                    bits that we might develop (I used
                                    it for some python helpers I'm using
                                    in eta for example).<br>
                                    * It seems to be the best permissive
                                    license because of the patents
                                    protection. It's the most popular at
                                    least.<br>
                                    <br>
                                    So I think there two choices
                                    basically:<br>
                                    <br>
                                    1 Copyleft VS non copyleft. I think
                                    copyleft has advantages and
                                    practically no real disadvantages
                                    for eta, xi and omega.<br>
                                    <br>
                                    2 GPLv2 VS GPLv3. Compatibility with
                                    Apache would be good (maybe not
                                    essential though? We could still use
                                    apache libraries I would think, just
                                    not freely cut/paste code).
                                    Anti-tivoization is tricky, I
                                    honestly can't make strong points
                                    one way or another. While I was
                                    initially sympathetic wi</div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </blockquote>
                            </blockquote>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </blockquote>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                  _______________________________________________<br>
                  Sugar-devel mailing list<br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel"
                    target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
                  <br>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <br>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
          <br>
          <br>
          -- <br>
          Daniel Narvaez<br>
          <br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      <br>
      -- <br>
      Daniel Narvaez<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>