Search results
The Eclipse SDK codebase was originally distributed under the CPL. The EPL 1.0 was derived from CPL version 1.0. As a result, much of the information provided in the Common Public License (CPL) Frequently Asked Questions document is relevant to the EPL, as well. The purpose of this FAQ is to highlight the differences.
- Eclipse Legal FAQ
Most Eclipse projects use the Eclipse Public License (EPL)...
- ECA
Eclipse Contributor Agreement. Version 3.1.0 January 14,...
- Licenses
The Eclipse Foundation is home to the Eclipse IDE, Jakarta...
- Version 1.0
1. DEFINITIONS. "Contribution" means: a) in the case of the...
- Eclipse Legal FAQ
- History of The Eclipse Public License
- Eclipse Public License: Key Provisions
- 1.0 vs. Epl-2.0
- Eclipse Public License vs. Other Weak Copyleft Licenses
- Eclipse Public License: The Bottom Line
The original version 1.0 of the Eclipse Public License was based on IBM’s Common Public License (CPL). There were two primary differences between the CPL and EPL-1.0. 1. IBM served as the agreement steward for the CPL, while the Eclipse Foundation is the agreement steward for the EPL 2. The EPL removed the following sentence from the CPL that cover...
As a weak copyleft license, the EPL is a middle ground of sorts between permissive options (like the MIT License or Apache License 2.0) and strong copyleft licenses (like GPL v2 and GPL v3.) A core requirement of the EPL — one that’s not part of permissive licenses — is that derivative works of EPL-licensed code must also be licensed under the EPL....
As mentioned, there are four major differences between the original version of the Eclipse Public License (EPL-1.0) and the current EPL-2.0. 1. In contrast to the original, the EPL-2.0 is suitable for scripting languages such as JavaScript, PHP, Python, and Ruby, among others. This is because the EPL-2.0 both defines source code and requires source...
As mentioned, the Eclipse Public License has a lot in common with other popular weak copyleft licenses like the LGPL and Mozilla Public License 2.0, but there are a handful of notable differences.
As a weak copyleft license, the EPL fills a gap between permissive and strong copyleft licenses. Although the EPL doesn’t rival the MIT or Apache 2.0 Licenses in popularity, several well-known projects are licensed under it. These include: 1. Eclipse’s Jetty Project 2. Eclipse’s Golo Language 3. Clojure (licensed under EPL-1.0) 4. AT&T’s Software T...
People also ask
What is Eclipse Public License (EPL)?
Should I relicense the Eclipse Public License v2.0 with a secondary license?
Is the Eclipse Public License deprecated?
Is Eclipse a copyleft license?
The Eclipse Public License is designed to be a business-friendly free software license, and features weaker copyleft provisions than licenses such as the GNU General Public License (GPL). The receiver of EPL-licensed programs can use, modify, copy and distribute the work and modified versions, in some cases being obligated to release their own ...
- 2.0
- EPL-2.0, EPL-1.0
- 24 August 2017
- Eclipse Foundation
The EPL-2.0 is the only license, until such time as it is combined and distributed with a work under the Secondary License. After such time, any recipient of the combined work can consider the content licensed under the Secondary License. The original work remains under the EPL-2.0 and is never really dual-licensed.
Early Bird Deadline: 31 May. Submit a talk for OCX and the collocated event by 31 May to be part of the inaugural event. Submit a Talk.
The Eclipse Public License (EPL) is the software license used by the Eclipse Foundation. It is an open source license. External links. Eclipse Public License — 2.0; Eclipse Public License — v1.0; EPL FAQ; Eclipse Public License at Wikipedia; Who uses the EPL. Eclipse.org projects; Symbian Foundation; Mondrian; Qooxdoo; Logback; Intuit via ...
