Karl Anderson wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong (and don't bother with the discussion on the
> merits or non- of the GPL, I don't care in this context), but:
> In order to link/incorporate a GPL'd module, you have to be able to
> distribute the entire work under the GPL.
> RMS says that the ZPL isn't compatible with the GPL; either you can't
> get something via rights given by the ZPL, then distribute it under
> the more restrictive rights of the GPL (the copyleft virus).  Or vice
> versa.
> Therefore, assuming RMS is correct, GPL'd components can't be
> distributed as part of a Zope solution.  You can link & use them, or
> distribute one and provide a pointer to the other for the other party
> to install, just not distribute them together to anyone else.
> Is this correct?  If it is, the GPL isn't very appropriate for the
> license of a Zope product, becuase it's a packaging nightmare.

While i'm not a GPL expert, I believe your interpretation is correct, in
that the distribution has to be separate. As far as packaging nightmare
goes, it might be an extra download link or cd in a distribution. Not
exactly a nightmare. I think a minor inconvience is worth giving freedom
to authors to make they're creations available as they wish.

and because you're a DC employee advocating against the GPL (for
specific reasons which amount to inconvience), i feel its important to
give a reason why you want to go through the inconvience:

I want to give my code to the community. i don't want people taking my
code from the community and distributing it without giving back. the
last thing i want to see is someone taking code from the community,
making changes to it and making it propertiary, and then selling it in
restricted form. if they sold it with source, thats fine. its not about
money, or code, its about freedom and enpowerment of the community.


Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Reply via email to