Hello everybody !
I was just looking up something on the OSI website when I saw that the
Ruby license isn't listed there. Because I was wondering about that I
had a look at the license:
You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL
(see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions below
Q: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
Kind regards
Dominik
Ruby is disjunctively licensed between Matz's Terms and the GPLV2:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txt
The only reason it's not listed on the OSI site is (AFAIK) no one has
sought their official approval.
However, a while ago I talked with the FSF to get their approval, and
I'm not sure if others did as well, but at any rate, it is listed as a
GPL compatible Free Software license due to the explicit dual
licensing with the GPL.
For this reason, I *assume* that means that it meets the OSI
definition as well, but I don't much pay attention to them. 
But in short, Ruby is Free and Open Source software...
-greg
On 7/11/07, cypher.dp@gmail.com <cypher.dp@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everybody !
I was just looking up something on the OSI website when I saw that the
Ruby license isn't listed there. Because I was wondering about that I
had a look at the license:You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL
(see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions belowQ: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
Hi!
You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL
(see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions belowQ: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
Ruby does not specify the GPL version therefore applies
"…If the Program does not specify a version number of this License,
you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation…"
Alternative license has already been mentioned by Gregory Brown.
IANAL but HTH,
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
- --
Blog available at http://www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-schugtjo/blog/
PGP key with id 6CC6574F available at http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
cypher.dp@gmail.com wrote:
It meets the DFSG too, which are pretty strict, otherwise it wouldn't be in Debian proper.
*t
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Gregory Brown wrote:
On 7/11/07, cypher.dp@gmail.com <cypher.dp@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everybody !
I was just looking up something on the OSI website when I saw that the
Ruby license isn't listed there. Because I was wondering about that I
had a look at the license:You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL
(see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions belowQ: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
Ruby is disjunctively licensed between Matz's Terms and the GPLV2:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txtThe only reason it's not listed on the OSI site is (AFAIK) no one has
sought their official approval.However, a while ago I talked with the FSF to get their approval, and
I'm not sure if others did as well, but at any rate, it is listed as a
GPL compatible Free Software license due to the explicit dual
licensing with the GPL.FSF Licensing & Compliance Team — Free Software Foundation — Working together for free software
For this reason, I *assume* that means that it meets the OSI
definition as well, but I don't much pay attention to them.But in short, Ruby is Free and Open Source software...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomas Pospisek
http://sourcepole.com - Linux & Open Source Solutions
-----------------------------------------------------------
There are costs associated with OSI approval. It is, thus, probably in
part the matter of money that has prevented the Ruby license from being
listed there.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 07:27:23AM +0900, Gregory Brown wrote:
On 7/11/07, cypher.dp@gmail.com <cypher.dp@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello everybody !
>
>I was just looking up something on the OSI website when I saw that the
>Ruby license isn't listed there. Because I was wondering about that I
>had a look at the license:
>
>You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL
>(see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions below
>
>Q: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?Ruby is disjunctively licensed between Matz's Terms and the GPLV2:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txtThe only reason it's not listed on the OSI site is (AFAIK) no one has
sought their official approval.
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Kent Beck: "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java. I
just didn't know it would be called Ruby."
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt wrote:
Q: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
Ruby does not specify the GPL version therefore applies
Hmm, seems to depend on the Ruby version.
Recent Ruby versions state GPL 2, License on ruby-talk doesn't.
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
- --
Blog available at http://www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-schugtjo/blog/
PGP key with id 6CC6574F available at http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
Right, I brought this up maybe a year ago and Matz decided to lock it
to GPLv2 (which is a smart move, as the 'or any later version' clause
is viral)
He said he was considering moving to GPL3 when it became finalized.
I've not asked what he thinks, and honestly haven't decided what I
think about GPL 3 
On 7/11/07, Josef 'Jupp' Schugt <jupp@gmx.de> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1Josef 'Jupp' Schugt wrote:
>> Q: Is Ruby know under the GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
>
> Ruby does not specify the GPL version therefore appliesHmm, seems to depend on the Ruby version.
Recent Ruby versions state GPL 2, License on ruby-talk doesn't.