On 28-jan-2006, at 0:53, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Ronald Oussoren wrote:Merging the two configure files might be a good idea anyway, that would take away the need to run configure from setup.py. IANAL, but I don't quite get how a GPL'd support script, if there is such a thing, in thebuild machinery of an extension library would require that Python itself is GPL'd.Section 2b) of the GPL. If a part of the program is GPL, the entire program must be. Also, you must include the entire source of theprogram, including all build scripts (section 3). So just including thegenerated configure, and omitting some of its input, would also be a license violation.
You have a point there. I'm not entirely convinced though, the argument that Python would be a derived work of libffi's aclocal.m4 when libffi were included in the Python repository seems very weak to me.It is a good argument to just drop libffi's configure script and integrate
the functionality of it in the main python configure script. That would remove all possible doubt and shouldn't be too much work. BTW. The argument that the readline module should be GPL licensed seems rather stronger, it's designed to work with a GPL-ed library and doesn't work with a BSD licensed work-alike of that library. Ronald
Regards, Martin
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
