Front page | perl.bootstrap |
Postings from July 2000
From: simon@brecon.co.uk [mailto:simon@brecon.co.uk] > > Benjamin Stuhl (lists.bootstrap): > >>And, more importantly, why? > > > >One word: GPL > > LPGL, actually. > > But we're going to throw away all the good development out there > for *POLITICAL* reasons? Are you truly barking mad? It's not a political issue. It's a legal one. The (L)GPL is a statement of permission, by the developer, of what conditions apply to the use if "his" (under copyright law) software. If we reuse code, we have to comply - both in terms of not violating the license of any software we reuse, and also in terms of not giving Perl a license which is incompatible with the license(s) of any of its components. Witness the Debian/KDE fun if you want to see this taken to its ultimate. (It's often presented as a openness/philosophy issue, but the Debian position is that KDE as the various licenses stand, is simply not legally distributable). Do we want Perl to get into this sort of situation, even by accident? Paul.