Tassilo Horn <tass...@member.fsf.org> writes: > Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> writes: > >> Tassilo Horn wrote: >> [...] >>> Or what's the general approach to open-source projects using both GPL >>> and possibly incompatible licenses? >> >> Ignore the allegedly "GPL incompatibility" nonsense. > > So that means that we are allowed to release the whole thing unter > Eclipse Public License and having some GPL libs bundled is "somewhat > ok"? Some kind of a gentlemen agreement aka "Well, it's not quite > compatible but since it is free in most regards, nobody will enforce > each and every detail".
Ignore the "Alexander Terekhov" nonsense. As long as you get every single copyright holder to agree, you can make use of whatever gentlemen agreement you want (but it might restrict people who are not in the deal). If not, you need to heed the conditions of every single license on every piece of code. Where you exceed the threshold of mere aggregation of independent components, the licenses might place restrictions on distribution of the resulting whole. That is nothing peculiar to the GPL. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
