Talk:CSL: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
= Projects = |
= Projects = |
||
== Project: Eclipse under CSL? == |
|||
The [http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/epl-v10.php EPL] states "A Contributor may choose to distribute the Program in object code form under its own license agreement", which could be the CSL. An Eclipse-[http://jemacs.sourceforge.net/ Jemacs] hybrid might be a good idea (for instance). --[[User:Fasten|fasten]] 19:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
= Comments = |
= Comments = |
Revision as of 19:08, 17 January 2009
Proposals
Proposal: CSL Membership License
At a fixed annual cost access to all software under CSL Membership License could be made available. CSL-EDU could be a special case for education providers. This license would allow a community of users and programmers with open access, similar to the open source community.
Proposal: CSL-EDU
The CSL-EDU license would be a special license for education providers. At a fixed cost the education provider can license all software that is made available under the CSL-EDU license. Licensor and education provider can negotiate the cost according to published policies of the Licensor. The Licensor is responsible to provide a license management system that allows to distribute and revoke licenses for students conveniently and to make software released under the CSL-EDU compatible with the licensing scheme. Licensors who do not meet that criterion cannot sell site licenses for education providers.
Proposal: Modular design
This is not a license issue but a design recommendation. CSL programs can build on a freely available core but allow plugins (similar to Firefox or Eclipse plugins) under the CSL license. One would probably want an option in the CSL license to either allow or disallow commercial plugins under different licenses.