On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 03:05:24PM -0500, colin wrote: > If we GPL Plex86, the host system will have to be GPL compatible. That means > we could never implement a Win2k hosted version of Plex86, e.g. Now, this may > now be a concern for most, but why choose a license that put such a arbitrary > restriction on us? I am sure there are some who would like this ability, once > Plex86 is mature.
Personally I don't care about that, I only use free software. But it isn't a restriction for not doing so if people really want that. I'm not sure plex86 really has to link with a proprietary library to make that possible (system calls aren't considered linking, so you can use a non-free kernel). And if it's needed to link with a proprietary library, we could add an exception for that (adding an exception is going to be some more work, because I think the copyright holder has to do that. I can ask the gnu people how that works if that will be the case). > Also, I don't think you (Jeroen and User1) really understand the GPL. You > can't "sheild" proprietory code from the GPL by an LGPL layer. Proprietory > code and GPL code can only coexist under two circumstances: 1) the copyright > holder grants an specific excetion or relicenses under a different license to > permit this coexistance and 2) the inherent exception that allows GPL > programs on proprietory OSes or proprietory programs on GPL OSes, where > either can run without the other and so is not considered a "derived work". > In particular, though an LGPL library can link with GPL code, it cannot link > with proprietory code at the same time. We can hope for 1) (as has been > mentioned elsewhere in this thread) but there's no hope for 2) as the host > code is specific to the host OS. I think I understand the GPL pretty good. I never told that it's possible to "shield" proprietary code from GPL'd code by LGPL'd code. I only said it was possible to link GPL'd code with LGPL'd code, I didn't say anything about linking that with proprietary code. An exception is the best way if that is needed at all. > Note that the GPL license cannot change the license on proprietory code, but > linking GPL to proprietory code (directly or otherwise) is a copyright > violation and is not legelly permitted. In other words, GPL does not change > anything else, but it does prohibit the use of the GPL code in some > circumstances. There is software which is GPL(-compatible) just because they wanted to link to GPL'd software. I think prohibiting linking with non-free software is a Good Thing, but if you want to start a flame war about that issue please do that privately and not bother the list about it. > All in all, I think LGPL is the right choice for Plex86 and would recommend > against changing it. Where GPL code could be useful, let's first try to get > use permission from the copyright holder (via an LGPL dual license?) and if > not possible, do an "enlightened" reimplementation. I don't think they will relicense their code, they use the GPL because they don't want their code being used with proprietary code. They want their code to be free forever and for everybody. Programs which uses that code should also be free, or else write it themself. I don't see in what way such an reimplementation is "enlightened". Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
