On Jul 25, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Joseph Ranieri wrote:
No RB source code can ever be anything other than GPL as the
That's a broad statement. There's nothing stopping people to
release under other licenses, such as the BSD license, etc.
Can you explain exactly how you came to this conclusion?
The LGPL requires your program to be open source (in this case, as
you can't provide linkable object files) if you're statically
linking it. All code in an Rb project is statically linked.
Declares to frameworks and such are not.
I am not a lawyer. But I could take a stab at modifying the language
of the LGPL to have the intended effect: you can use the libraries in
your application without needing to release its source code, but if
you modify or extend the OR code itself, you're required to ship
release those modifications.
I'd be surprised if there wasn't an already-written license to that
effect available somewhere-or-other.
Perhaps there is a lawyer on this list who could assist with that.
So, my intent would be to release the code under a license with an
effect morally equivalent to the LGPL.
Guyren G Howe
guyren-at-relevantlogic.com
http://relevantlogic.com
REALbasic, PHP, Python programming
PostgreSQL, MySQL database design and consulting
Technical writing and training
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
