Tcllib and New License Addition?

[greg]

Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository. The
license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they require
payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for an
open-source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if the
file was perhaps added by mistake.

https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms

best regards
Gregor

[Gerald Lester]

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository. The
license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they require
payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for an
open-source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if the
file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms

WTF, the proper license is
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license.terms.

This was added in https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/info/0b0d3c2be7e04e75
and seems to apply to the AES upgrade, in particular to the use of the
accelerator and the test suite.

I hold copyright to several of the packages in TclLib and do not agree
to the change to the general TclLib licensing. We can't pollute TclLib
with GPL licnses!

I'm wondering if Thorsten Schloermann, Pat Thoyts, Andreas Kupries and
agreed to Nathan Coulter change of the license terms since they are the
origingal copyright holders.

[Rich]

Post by Gerald Lester

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository. The
license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they require
payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for an
open-source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if the
file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms

WTF, the proper license is
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license.terms.
This was added in https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/info/0b0d3c2be7e04e75
and seems to apply to the AES upgrade, in particular to the use of the
accelerator and the test suite.
I hold copyright to several of the packages in TclLib and do not agree
to the change to the general TclLib licensing. We can't pollute TclLib
with GPL licnses!
I'm wondering if Thorsten Schloermann, Pat Thoyts, Andreas Kupries and
agreed to Nathan Coulter change of the license terms since they are the
origingal copyright holders.

So, once again, pooryorick (aka Nathan Coulter) up to no good.

First the wiki, now Tcllib.

[Gerald Lester]

Post by Rich

Post by Gerald Lester

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository. The
license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they require
payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for an
open-source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if the
file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms

WTF, the proper license is
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license.terms.
This was added in https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/info/0b0d3c2be7e04e75
and seems to apply to the AES upgrade, in particular to the use of the
accelerator and the test suite.
I hold copyright to several of the packages in TclLib and do not agree
to the change to the general TclLib licensing. We can't pollute TclLib
with GPL licnses!
I'm wondering if Thorsten Schloermann, Pat Thoyts, Andreas Kupries and
agreed to Nathan Coulter change of the license terms since they are the
origingal copyright holders.

So, once again, pooryorick (aka Nathan Coulter) up to no good.
First the wiki, now Tcllib.

Time to take a head?

[greg]

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository. The
license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they require
payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for an open-
source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if the file
was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms
best regards
Gregor

Hello,

I recently posted about the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib
repository. I have since realized that the file is actually part of a
branch that is not the official branch (trunk). I apologize for any
confusion this may have caused.

It seems the license in question might only apply to certain features or
specific branches and is not part of the official Tcllib version.

best regards
Gregor

[Gerald Lester]

Post by greg

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository.
The license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they
require payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for
an open- source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if
the file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms
best regards
Gregor

Hello,
I recently posted about the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib
repository. I have since realized that the file is actually part of a
branch that is not the official branch (trunk). I apologize for any
confusion this may have caused.
It seems the license in question might only apply to certain features or
specific branches and is not part of the official Tcllib version.

No need to apologize. You have brought a potential problem to the
community's attention.

[greg]

Post by greg

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository.
The license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they
require payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for
an open- source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or if
the file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms
best regards
Gregor

Hello,
I recently posted about the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib
repository. I have since realized that the file is actually part of a
branch that is not the official branch (trunk). I apologize for any
confusion this may have caused.
It seems the license in question might only apply to certain features or
specific branches and is not part of the official Tcllib version.
best regards
Gregor

Hello,

first of all, I want to thank Gerald Lester and Rich for their responses
and insights. I really appreciate the clarification regarding the
license situation in Tcllib.

I understand now that Tcllib is not officially part of the Tcl/Tk core,
but for me, it feels like an essential part of the Tcl/Tk ecosystem.
Therefore, I find the introduction of a license requiring payment for
productive use quite problematic and not in line with the spirit of
open-source software, which Tcl/Tk has always represented for me.

Of course, the decision regarding the license is ultimately up to the
developer. However, in my opinion, such licenses are better suited for
the developer's own separate libraries rather than being included in
Tcl/Tk, Tcllib, or Tklib.

I am "only" an enthusiastic user of this outstanding system Tcl/Tk, its
developers, and the community, and I am truly grateful for all the work
that has been done.

Best regards,
Gregor

[Gerald Lester]

Post by greg

Post by greg

Post by greg
Hello,
I came across the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib repository.
The license conditions seem interesting and unconventional, as they
require payment for productive use. To me, this is rather unusual for
an open- source library, so I wonder if this was indeed intended or
if the file was perhaps added by mistake.
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcllib/file?name=license_fsul.terms
best regards
Gregor

Hello,
I recently posted about the license_fsul.terms file in the Tcllib
repository. I have since realized that the file is actually part of a
branch that is not the official branch (trunk). I apologize for any
confusion this may have caused.
It seems the license in question might only apply to certain features
or specific branches and is not part of the official Tcllib version.
best regards
Gregor

Hello,
first of all, I want to thank Gerald Lester and Rich for their responses
and insights. I really appreciate the clarification regarding the
license situation in Tcllib.
I understand now that Tcllib is not officially part of the Tcl/Tk core,
but for me, it feels like an essential part of the Tcl/Tk ecosystem.
Therefore, I find the introduction of a license requiring payment for
productive use quite problematic and not in line with the spirit of
open-source software, which Tcl/Tk has always represented for me.
Of course, the decision regarding the license is ultimately up to the
developer. However, in my opinion, such licenses are better suited for
the developer's own separate libraries rather than being included in
Tcl/Tk, Tcllib, or Tklib.
I am "only" an enthusiastic user of this outstanding system Tcl/Tk, its
developers, and the community, and I am truly grateful for all the work
that has been done.

While TclLib is not "core" it is managed. It is "under" the
core.tcl-lang.org. Thus the licenses are not entirely up to the developer.

Again, thanks for bringing an issue to the attention of the community so
that it can be addressed.