On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:58:28AM -0400, Thompson, David wrote: > > + (home-page "http://bioruby.org/";) > > + ;; Code is released under Ruby license, except for setup > > + ;; (LGPLv2.1+), scripts in samples (GPL2 and GPL2+) > > + (license (list license:ruby license:lgpl2.1+ license:gpl2 > > + license:gpl2+ )))) > > Wouldn't this make the collective work GPL2+? Ludo or Mark, can you > weigh in here?
I don't think so. 98% of the code is under the Ruby license, including the libraries and the Ruby shell. Only a few small scripts have other licenses. I would argue these scripts are hardly used, including setup :) Pj.
