Open Stack

I think that would be a good idea.  We're not shipping this, we're just 
using it in test (AIUI), so I don't think incompatibility with the 
OpenStack license is necessarily an issue.  But IANAL. :-)

-Ben

On 04/02/2014 09:24 AM, Kevin Conway wrote:
> I understand, and appreciate, the concern for licensing, but it would be a
> real shame to discount some of the most widely used linters because of a
> clause that prevents us from being evil.
>
> Any chance we could run this by legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org and hear
> their reactions before we axe the JS*int projects from OpenStack?
>
> On 4/2/14 8:43 AM, "Radomir Dopieralski" <openstack at sheep.art.pl> wrote:
>
>> On 02/04/14 15:26, Kevin Conway wrote:
>>> What licensing issues were brought up that prevent the use of JSLint or
>>> JSHint? Both are MIT licensed.
>>>
>>> Granted, JSLint has an additional clause:
>>>
>>>      The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe that's it? If so, Crockford has been known to make exceptions for
>>> organizations that wish to use his code for potentially evil
>>> purposes:
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C-JoyNuQJs&feature=player_detailpage#t=2
>>> 480s.
>>
>> Yes, that's exactly it. An exception is not enough -- that clause simply
>> makes that license incompatible with OpenStack's license. To use it, we
>> would need to change OpenStack's license too, and it quickly becomes
>> quite complex.
>>
>> You have to remember that organizations like NSA use OpenStack, so we
>> can't possibly include that clause in its license ;)
>>
>> --
>> Radomir Dopieralski
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>