[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
As the discussion has gone on,
it is turning out quite interesting :
The GPL will cover such intensive usages of GCC as
derived works. Passing compiler data into another
process that just continues working on it will be a
extension of the compiler.
That is a synopsis of the option from stallman and
torvalds.
This has a great effect on Dual Licenced code,
as soon as you start creating derived works that are
derived from GPL, you cannot free that licence for
usage in the more permissive licence.
That is the GNU side of the story.
Please read the threads on perl monks :
http://perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=148162
or on the
gcc mailing list :
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-02/msg01792.html
The implications for many of the current programs that
would be invalidated by such tightening of the
Dual-Licence usage are scary.
Mike
--- Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>
wrote:
> > From: James Michael DuPont
> [mailto:mdupont777@yahoo.com]
>
> <snip/>
>
> > XML-RPC and Soap are just two ways to invoke
> remotely.
> > Currently I am using a patched version of the
GNU
> C
> > Compiler that streams the XML into a perl script
> via a
> > PIPE using POPEN.
> >
> > This causes all types of problems with the GPL
and
> I
> > just wanted to bring that up here and see if you
> have
> > anything to say.
>
> I've been thinking for awhile that GPL's whole
> notion of "linking" is
> archaic with modern software architectures. I
don't
> see how it is really
> tenable. LGPL seems only slightly better.
>
> GPL with library exception seems reasonable,
though.
> However, I'm no expert
> with this, and it's not clear to me what
substantive
> differences there are
> between GPL with library exception and the Mozilla
> Public License (other
> than the political manifesto that the former
> includes in its license).
=====
James Michael DuPont
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
|
