I don’t think we should be trusting LLM output for questions like these. The GPL FAQ directly addresses the bindings between interpreted code modules (text, not binary) and the need for distribution of code under the GPL to either be under the same version code or a compatible license.
On Sat, 13 Sep 2025 at 11:53 am, Charles Plessy < charles-listes...@plessy.org> wrote: > Le Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 10:42:56AM +0300, Ilmari Tamminen a écrit : > > > >I am very likely to ask about the topic from a software lawyer for my > >particular case. But to form educated questions, I first need to get > >some basic understanding, and also hear how the community thinks about > >these issues. > > Hi Ilmari, > > there is an important point to consider in order to have the big picture > before asking for legal advice: on whom is the burden of license > compatibility. > > I first wrote a long example, but here is a LLM summary that I am > very satisfied of: > > GPL‑2‑only and GPL‑3 are not license‑compatible when combined into a > single derivative work, but this is rarely an issue for developers who > only distribute source code — private use is unrestricted, and separate > works can be redistributed side‑by‑side. > > The problem arises when redistributing binaries or other combined > artefacts: if any binary contains code from both, it cannot be legally > redistributed. > > This risk extends to container images: while a generic image bundling > many unrelated packages is usually fine, an image built to run two > incompatible‑licensed components together could be considered a single > work, triggering the same restrictions. > > So I think that the big question is not only on how you comply to > license terms, some of which you can chose as you are the copyright > holder, but also how your choices empower the downstream community to > comply. > > Best, > > Charles > > -- > Charles Plessy Nagahama, Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan > Debian Med packaging team http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med > Tooting from work, https://fediscience.org/@charles_plessy > Tooting from home, https://framapiaf.org/@charles_plessy > > ______________________________________________ > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
