Nate Lowrie wrote: > On 1/23/07, Paul McNett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Uwe Grauer wrote: >>> Paul McNett wrote: >>>> Ed Leafe wrote: >>>>> On Jan 23, 2007, at 3:30 PM, Paul McNett wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I meant: why can't Nate's serial debugging tool be part of DaboDemo? >>>>>> There's no reason for Dabo or DaboDemo to distribute serial. >>>>> Depends on your legal interpretations. If you write code that links >>>>> to a GPL library, there are many schools of thought (read: MySQL) >>>>> that considers that sufficient to require all your code to be GPL'd. >>>> What do you mean by "link"? I haven't heard anyone say that merely >>>> having code that is meant to be linked to a GPL program at runtime is >>>> enough to GPL your own code. If that were true, MySQLdb would be GPL'd >>>> because it "links" to MySQL, and hence Dabo would be GPL'd because it >>>> links to MySQLdb. >>>> >>>> >>> Dabo isn't using the MySQLdb connector to make it work. >>> If MySQLdb would be used for the preferences instead of sqlite, >>> dabo had to be GPL. >> Only if Dabo distributed MySQLdb. Merely requiring it doesn't link it to >> Dabo. >> >>> Redistribution of GPL connectors would also violate the GPL. >> Redistribution of GPL software is allowed and encouraged, and expressly >> protected; certainly it isn't a violation of the GPL to redistribute. It >> is only when you link it to your software where you risk making your >> software GPL as well. The question is the term "link". If we had made >> Dabo's preferences save to MySQL, *and* we had rolled up MySQLdb into >> Dabo and redistributed it, *then* we would be GPL. But if we merely made >> MySQLdb a requirement and left it up to our users to install the >> dependencies, this would not be the case. >> > > I agree with Paul on this one. Let's think about it in these terms. > Suppose Dabo was GPL'd. What Ed is saying is that any program using > the Dabo Framework would have to be GPL'd as well because it "links" > to Dabo. What about a massive GPL'd project like Linux then? Sorry > Ed, your logic just doesn't make sense. > > Even if we did distribute MySQL or another GPL'd library or program > with Dabo, why should all of the program be GPL'd. The FAQ was clear > that GPL'd and commercial libraries can be put together. >
It is also my impression that if dabo would require mysql to function (or to work), then dabo had to be GPL. Fortunately this isn't the case. Uwe _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
