[Fwd: curl]

[Torsten Anders]

Dear all,

my original idea was to  continue the development of orphaned Mogul  
projects in the new meta project (e.g., ozh in Mogul is still only  
for Mozart 1.2.5). We probably should keep the Mogul infrastructure  
for the distribution of releases. On the other hand, Mogul was never  
intended as a development platform. This new project complements  
Mogul by providing the infrastructure for a collaborative development .

Certainly, we need to get the permission of the original developers  
if we want to "take over" the development. I already talked with Nils  
Franzén concerning ozh. He would welcome if we continue the  
development and even allows to change the license.

Naturally, all projects must be released under some open source  
license for a collaborative development. I am not sure whether all  
projects within the meta project must have the same license, but it  
would certainly simplify matters. Any preferences?

Best
Torsten

PS: should this discussion move to the Oz user list?


On Jul 20, 2007, at 1:58 AM, Gustavo Gutierrez wrote:

> Just a question, how this project will be related to mogul?, i am
> asking it because i feel the spirit of this project is close related
> to the intention of mogul. Do you think every package in mogul should
> have its sources in this new project? I think this could improve the
> functionality of mogul software.
>
> Another issue is concerned with the license this new project will be
> available under. As we are talking about a meta-project that will
> contain sub project we need to choose some license scheme, for
> instance, to force all packages to be distributed under the same
> license X (being X something like gnu, gpl, etc.)
>
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Gustavo Gutierrez
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> ___________
> mozart-hackers mailing list                           mozart- 
> hackers at mozart-oz.org      http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/ 
> listinfo/mozart-hackers