Open/Free Licenses (was: propose: `cypherpunks license' (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code))

[Richard Stallman]

    2. Given that several releases have been made, the adoption of the
       MPL license for E cannot be undone.

You're right--the fact that several versions of E are available
under the MPL cannot be changed.

But that's ok.  Having old versions (or even future versions)
available under the MPL is not a *problem*, at least not in my view.
What I'm interested in is having future versions available under terms
that are compatible with the GPL.  I presume you would want any new
terms to be compatible with the MPL also.

There are many ways to do that.  One is to release under "MPL or GNU
GPL", in the same way that Perl is released under "Artistic license or
GNU GPL".

Another is to use the LGPL--that is compatible with the MPL, the GPL,
and everything.  Or you could use the distribution terms of Guile,
which is "GPL plus permission to link with anything else".

There are other ways too; if none of these is acceptable,
we can discuss alternatives.