ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@bost.de>
Subject Re: GUI for Ant
Date Tue, 26 Sep 2000 15:48:16 GMT
>>>>> "MS" == Michael Stanley <mstanley@twcny.rr.com> writes:

 MS> Stefan Bodewig writes: 

 >> Anthill could distribute Ant BTW as APL is not infective
 >> (i.e. using GPLed code makes your own code GPLed while the APL
 >> does bot enforce somthing similar).

 MS> Don't really understand this statement.  Care to explain a little
 MS> further.

Almost forgot the IANAL disclaimer.

I think Pete has proven me wrong already on whether any GPL software
could include Apache licensed software.

With regard to the infective nature of the GPL:

See <URL:http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html#SEC3> number 2 b). "You
must cause any work [...] that in whole or in part [...] is derived
from the Program [...] to be licensed as a whole [...] under the terms
of this license". 

I hope my omissions clarify what I'm after without changing the
original intent.

This simply means, if you use any GPL software inside your own
product, your product must fall under the GPL as well.

The strongest claims the Apache Software License makes, are that
you may not call derivate work "Apache" and that you state the
software has been derived from Apache software. You are even allowed
to close source software derived from Apache software.

This difference is a major part of the whole philosophy of the FSF and
you'll either agree with it (i.e. all software should be free - free
according to the FSF's definition) or you don't. If you do, use the
GPL for your own software.

Stefan

Mime
View raw message