This is sometimes referred to as file-based copyleft.
#Figleaf pittsburgh pa code
The new code files can be kept proprietary or released under a different license. However, if the author keeps the MPL’d code in separate files, they can combine that code with closed-source code to create an aggregate work. If an author reworks any of the original files, they have to release those updates when distributing the code and license them under the MPL. Weak copyleft licenses like the Mozilla Public License 2.0 also require users to disclose their changes to the source code, but requires sharing of a narrower set of code. In other words, the updated code must be licensed under the initial copyleft license, where it will be subject to source code disclosure requirements. Strong copyleft licenses like GPL v2 and GPL v3 allow modification and redistribution of the original code, but only under the condition that users make the entire program available under the same license. The difference between the two forms of copyleft licenses lies in the scope of source code to be shared. The Mozilla Public License 2.0 is in the latter group. Copyleft licenses, in turn, come in two flavors: strong and weak.
#Figleaf pittsburgh pa software
Open source software licenses fall into two categories: permissive and copyleft. So, what makes Mozilla Public License 2.0 distinctive, and why might an OSS user or author like the MPL 2.0? We’ll address these questions and more below. Often termed a “weak copyleft” license, MPL 2.0 falls somewhere in the middle. The MPL 2.0 is neither a permissive license like the MIT License (which allows for use of the licensed code with very few restrictions) nor a strong copyleft license like the GPL v2 License (which places numerous restrictions on use). Over a decade later, in 2010, Mozilla Public License 2.0 made its debut, and has remained the MPL of choice ever since. Version 1.0 of the Mozilla Public License (MPL) was released in 1998, with a slightly modified Version 1.1 introduced the following year. It’s therefore no surprise that the Mozilla Foundation has created its own open source license, the Mozilla Public License. Open source software contributors, however, may also know Mozilla for its commitment to keeping the internet a free and public resource, a mission that matches the ethos of OSS development.
The average person likely associates the Mozilla Foundation with its browser, Mozilla Firefox.
0 kommentar(er)
