ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Wielaard <m...@klomp.org>
Subject Re: Ant licensing issues (fwd)
Date Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:58:58 GMT
Hi,

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 01:00:59AM +1000, Peter Donald wrote:
> At 08:24  23/10/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >You may find this useful, if you need to link against non-free programs
> >while using GPL.

>  As a special exception, <name of copyright holder> gives permission to
>  link this program with <FOO>, and distribute the resulting executable,
>  without including the source code for <FOO> in the source distribution.
> 
> <FOO> would be the official name of the specific software package that
> your program must link against to work properly. You can include
> multiple paragraphs like the last one if there are additional programs.
 
> yep - but that essentially makes your program not-GPL compatable and thus
> not really GPL ;)

That is indeed the case. I find it strange that the FSF recommends this
language. They could easily have recommended the following language which
would make the code really GPL when a free version of FOO would be available
later. The license of Guile (a GNU extension language library) adds the
following:

 * [...]
 * If you write modifications of your own for GUILE, it is your choice
 * whether to permit this exception to apply to your modifications.
 * If you do not wish that, delete this exception notice.

That gives you the option to remove the exception later to make it
really GPL when the free version of the library is released.

> >I assume this won't land on Slashdot.org, like last night...
> 
> hmmm ? Did I miss something ?

Someone posted a conversation with RMS on Free Software licensing
<http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/10/22/1553233&mode=nested>

Cheers,

Mark

Mime
View raw message