Alfresco shifts to GPL

[Matt Asay]

That is what we're doing (selling support for the GPL version).  We just
didn't express it well (or I didn't, below).  Certification of third-party
apps to work with Enterprise, our growing Network offering, support - these
are the services we wrap around the GPL code.  But the code is GPL.

On the white paper, some aspects are residuals from the old one.  We had a
lot to do to get the release out (and under the GPL), so now I get to clean
up last-minute errors.  Thanks for catching those!

Matt


> From: Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu>
> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:04:14 -0500
> To: License Discuss <license-discuss at opensource.org>
> Subject: Re: Alfresco shifts to GPL
> 
> Matt Asay wrote:
>> Indeed, I've been working toward this for the past 1.5 years.
> 
> Congratulations.
>> On that note, I want to express thanks to everyone on this list who helped
>> to hound us (and others).
> 
> Sure.  Now go out and be a successful example. ;) On that note, I don't
> get "We provide Community free of charge and offer no support for the
> product, paid or otherwise"
> (http://www.alfresco.com/legal/licensing/whitepaper/).  If you really
> want "encourage everyone to use the GPL" then why won't you *sell*
> support for the GPL version?  Everyone says they're going to charge for
> support but then instead makes money off these illusory Enterprise
> editions, which in your case are apparently bit-for-bit identical, yet
> somehow "better tested" or "certified".  Other parts of that white paper
> are sketchy too, like "if you are distributing unmodified copies of
> Alfresco Community over a Web site, please do this by providing a link
> directly to our site" and "Alfresco users may freely modify our source
> code without contributing anything back to us, provided that they do not
> distribute these derivative works."  On the latter, maybe it's mixing up
> contributing back (i.e. copyright assignment) with GPL licensing.
> 
> However, kudos on "To make this easier for you, our source downloads ­
> as opposed to our binaries ­ do not include our logos."
> 
> Matthew Flaschen
> 
>> As ever, the open source community's best policing mechanism is peer
>> pressure.  
>> 
>> Matt 
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu>
>>> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:13:50 -0500
>>> To: License Discuss <license-discuss at opensource.org>
>>> Subject: Re: Alfresco shifts to GPL
>>> 
>>> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>>> Some good news in the license consolidation (and badgeware) discussion:
>>>> 
>>>>         The company's free Community edition previously used the Mozilla
>>>>         Public License, but the move to GPL removes some barriers, said
>>>>         Matt Asay, Alfresco's vice president of marketing. The company's
>>>>         supported and Enterprise edition remains available under a
>>>>         commercial license.
>>>>         
>>>>         "We wanted the code to be bigger than the company," Asay said.
>>>>         "People basically know what (the GPL) means, so there's no time
>>>>         wasted wondering (about) MPL [and extra exhibit B clauses]."
>>>>         
>>>>         [...]
>>>>         
>>>>         the company did add to the GPL license a "FLOSS exception"
>>>>         provision that permits the software to be embedded in other
>>>>         FLOSS (free/libre/open-source software) packages. With the
>>>>         exception, those other projects don't have to worry about a
>>>>         potential requirement to release their own software under the
>>>>         GPL, Asay said.
>>> Excellent.  I remember Matt Asay saying he was working towards a GPL
>>> release.  It looks like he pulled it off. :)  Now, maybe he can start a
>>> trend.
>>> 
>>> Matt Flaschen
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> 
> 
>