Make it was same as ruby. 

On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 08:17, Simon Strandgaard wrote:
> We are planning to make a Ruby Operating System (ROS),
> http://ros.rubyforge.org/
> 
> We have some concerns about which license policy we should choose,
> OSI compatibility.. I am no expert on this.
> 
> Any advices/hints/opinions are appreciated ?
> 
> --
> Simon Strandgaard
> 
> 
> citing discussion between shasckaw and me:
> 
> Simon Strandgaard wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 23:27, Shasckaw wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>>>Now this presetation is off, I have another question.
> >>>>What would be the licensing policy of ROS?
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>I think overall license should be Ruby License.
> >>>Unless the subproject developers have other ideas, then LGPL and BSD
> >>>license are ok.
> >>>For non-vital stuff, GPL are ok.
> >>>
> >>>How would you like it to be ?
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Whatever the licenses used, they must compatible, the overall system 
> >>must be license consistent, and it can be a hard work if we aren't 
> >>cautious. If we expect to use a lot of Gnu software, which are most of 
> >>time GPLed software, we must be cautious with Gpl compatibility. For the 
> >>FSF licenses compatibility analysing, see this page: 
> >>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html . Ruby license is not 
> >>listed here, too bad.
> >>
> >>*I'm currently seeking additional informations*
> >>I can't find Ruby license on OSI: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/
> >>
> >>*after more search*
> >>Ruby has a double licensing, like perl. It can be GPL. The other 
> >>possibility is an original one, specific to ruby, and I don't know 
> >>anything about its GPL compatibility. Primarly, it seems ok but I'm no 
> >>expert.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >You seems to be much more into licenses than what I am.
> >I am really bad at reading licenses because English are not my native
> >language. They trend to use different terminology than what I am
> >familiar with.
> >
> >If you think you have a good understanding of licenses, then you should
> >decide ROS'es license scheme.
> >  
> >
> Glups.
> My mother tongue is not english either, it is french (I live in belgium)
> And I'm not lawyer at all.
> And determining a license scheme is a truly hard thing, we must have a 
> really clear idea of the organisation of Ros.
> 
> What I know about licenses tell me that their use is easy when you just 
> use one license with no third party code with different license, and 
> their use is headache when you want to use multiple licensing or when 
> you want to keep the copyright. And you can rapidly use multiple 
> licensing just when using third party code.
> 
> How can we know how to do?
> Well, what about asking FSF or OSI about the compatibility of Ruby 
> license with GPL and others?
-- 

 .''`.     Paul William
: :'  :    Debian admin and user
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system