Well, it wouldn't be a problem to re-license Codespeed as GPLv2+ anyway...
2010/12/16 Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen <[email protected]>: > On 16 Dec 2010, at 20:27, Alex Gaynor wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Please note that any use of the Python API means that the entire >>>> application is covered by the GPL. >>> >>> How is it even technically possible? It does not link against >>> mercurial and GPL specifically excludes anything about *running* your >>> software. >> >> Because the term "link" is totally meaningless in the context of Python >> code. Some people say this means it's impossible for Python to invoke >> that >> clause of the GPL, others say it means `import`ing something invokes it. >> There's no correct answer. > > Well, some people believe that any use of a GPL API constitutes a derivative > work, and is thus covered by it. Mercurial even went through a licence > change from GPLv2 to GPLv2+ to get rid of this ambiguity. See the links > below; otherwise the convert extension (which is distributed with Mercurial) > might be in violation of its own licence. > > <http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/MercurialApi> > <http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/License> > > <http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Relicensing> > <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2009-September/027740.html> > <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/2009-October/015963.html> > > Anyway, as long as your code is open, people are unlikely to care enough to > do anything about it… > > -- > > Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev > _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
