Search results
People also ask
Are OSI-compliant licenses compatible with the Eclipse Public License (EPL)?
Can I use a license if I'm not OSI certified?
What is the difference between Eclipse Public License and GNU GPL?
Should I relicense the Eclipse Public License v2.0 with a secondary license?
However, there are licenses for software content which meet Eclipse’s requirements for compatibility with the EPL and downstream commercial re-distribution that are not OSI certified, and Eclipse projects may make use of such licenses after review and approval by the Eclipse Foundation.
- Eclipse Public License 1.0 (EPL) Frequently Asked Questions
The reverse is also true: there are OSI-compliant licenses...
- Eclipse Public License Version 2.0 Approved By OSI and ...
The changes introduced in EPL v2 are intended to make the...
- Eclipse Public License 1.0 (EPL) Frequently Asked Questions
- 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...
Jul 20, 2020 · 1. What are the terms and conditions of the Eclipse Public License? 2. Is it considered a copyleft license? 3. What is the difference between the Eclipse Public License and IBM’s Common Public License (CPL)? 4. What is the difference between the Eclipse Public License and the GNU GPL? 5. Is Eclipse Public License compatible with the GNU GPL? 6.
The EPL is listed as a free software license by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). [3] [2] Discussion of a new version of the EPL began in May 2013. [9]
The EPL permits only contributions and anhancements to the original work but does not allow to use code from a EPL licensed work in another work. So the EPL is even more restrictive than the GPL. For this reason, the OSSCC does not recommend to use the EPL for new projects.
