On 08/07/2012 01:34 AM, Luis Villa wrote:
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Tom Marble <tmarble(a)info9.net>
> AFAICT the incompatibility rises from the EPL choice of venue 
> which makes EPL not GPL compatible.
There is a deeper problem, inherent to the nature of copyleft. EPL states:
"When the Program is made available in source code form:
a) it must be made available under this Agreement;"
That's the essence of the copyleft, and says "once the source is under
this license, it must stay under this license." Other copylefts have
the same kind of language, leading to a conflict - both licenses say
"the _entire copylefted work_ must be under this license," so as soon
as there is overlap between the two copylefted works (say, because you
place one EPL file in a GPL application, or vice-versa), you have a
MPL 2, Sec. 3.3, or copyleft.next Sec. 11, get around this to some
extent, but only one-way. Short of an EPL 2.0 that has a similar
clause I don't think you can have the sort of compatibility you seem
Luis, what's your take (if any) on MPL/EPL compatibility?