Hi Erich,
Thank you for getting back to me on this.
Yes I do agree with you on this.
> working out, that ANY program written to run on a Forth system,
> extents that very system (you cannot distinguish between words
> from Forth or your words in compiled form), no matter what. If

It tends to get a little more complicated when it becomes embedded in or
used on other
systems. How do you use forth on linux or Windows without violating GPLv3 ?
There is a dividing line here somewhere, I wish this could be a night or
day issue (clear cut), MIT licensing
seems to do that.
I can keep AmForth on a separate processor (under GPLv3) and integrate a
minimal forth (under MIT) which
I already have and still proceed with my work. Useful findings will be
passed back to the AmForth community.

Thanks again for getting back to me on this issue,
John S
PS: In the beginning the Word was.


On Sat, Feb 7, 2026 at 4:54 AM Erich Wälde <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello John,
>
> I would ask you to discuss this in the open on the mailing list,
> please.
>
>
> That being said, we had licensing discussions when GPLv2 was
> replaced by GPLv3. At the time some effort was put into clearly
> working out, that ANY program written to run on a Forth system,
> extents that very system (you cannot distinguish between words
> from Forth or your words in compiled form), no matter what. If
> licensing is a thing, there is only one way out: start with a
> system featuring a license of your liking.
>
> Cheers,
> Erich
>
> John Sarabacha <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Hi Erich,
> > I wanted to pass this by you first,  my version (split/fork)
> > changed significantly from the original work, which is authored by me,
> to change
> > the licensing of these changes from GPLv3 to MIT. Matthias (asleep in
> death in
> > my belief system) being the original author is no longer available to
> decide.
> >
> >> Now, I'm not anywhere near to decide, what happens to AmForth,
> >>because Matthias has left this planet. And who does the work is
> >>going to decide. Whether or not building AmForth on C or C
> >>macros, or pure gnu assembly for riscv, or whether to switch to
> >>a direct threaded code model, or a native code model, or whether
> >>squeezing out every clock cycle possible --- these are all
> >>questions, that I cannot answer. I would encourage a split/fork
> >>and call the thing AmForth-riscv and NOT look left or right to
> >>other targets. But that is just my humble opinion.
> >
> > Hope to hear from you,
> > John S
>
> --
> May the Forth be with you ...
>

_______________________________________________
Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel

Reply via email to