Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En réponse à Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Since Emacsen are GPL-licensed, do Emacs modes have to be shipped > > > under a GPL-compatible license? > > > > Pretty much. It is possible to write stand-alone elisp code that > > only uses Emacs internals. At that point you are okay, treating > > Emacs has an interpreter only (so the code it interprets doesn't > > have to be under a GPL-compatible license). But as soon as you load > > an Emacs lisp > > Err, I thought the license of interpreted programs had to be > compatible with the license of interpreters
I don't think so. > (I recall the Python > licensing problems, before Python 2.1). Did I misunderstand? I don't recall what the issues were. > > library > > and use it, then you'll using a GPL'ed library (as opposed to an > > LGPL'ed > > one) and your code must be GPL-compatible (if you distribute it of > > course). > > Ah, you mean that there is only a problem when an elisp code loads > some elisp libraries ? Right. > > > I discovered one of them which > > > could be problematic. > > > > Is it ilisp? > > No, erlang-mode, which is licensed under EPL. Yeah, it loads various libraries. I haven't looked at the license to see what makes it GPL-uncompatible. While you're at it, ask the DD to byte-compile the files like most all other elisp packages do! :-) Peter
