Are restrictions on the *use* or *results* of proprietary compilers consistent with generating open source programs in that language? Can the copying of binary code into an executable by the compiler itself affect the license on that executable?
I have heard people ask if running a GPL compiler that includes GPL libraries into a resulting program creates a GPL obligation for the resulting program. I hope not! /Larry -----Original Message----- From: Richard Fontana [mailto:rfont...@redhat.com] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 11:13 AM To: Karl Fogel; license-discuss@opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Making the PHP FAQ generic On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 01:07:23PM -0600, Karl Fogel wrote: > Also, it might good to talk about implementations of languages being > open source, rather than the languages themselves. It's a bit > pedantic, but I think it can be worded naturally, and it would > emphasize the conceptual cut one has to make to really understand the > answer. If you compile your C program with Borland's C compiler, that > doesn't make your program closed-source; by the same token, if you run > your Python program on the most widely-used implementation of Python, > which is open source, that doesn't make your code open source by default. > > People who ask that question may think they're asking about the > language, but they're really asking about the particular language > implementation. This should be made clear to them in the answer. +1. I encounter a surprising amount of confusion about this point. - Richard _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss