[linux-elitists] compatability between Artistic Licence and GPL
Mon Aug 14 12:52:13 PDT 2000
Private cc depricated.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 11:12:16AM -0700, Ben Woodard wrote:
> > --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 12:56:13PM -0700, Ben Woodard wrote:
> > > Does anyone know about any problems incorporating calls into GPL'd
> > > (not LGPL'd) libraries into code that has an artistic licence?
> > Artistic allows relicensing.
> > For the purposes of the incorporated libraries LGPL shouldn't be an
> > issue (so long as you're referencing, not changing, the library), GPL
> > would require the combined work be available under the terms of the GPL.
> So is it safe to say that if something is under an artistic licence
> and it links to a GPL'd library then if someone wants to relicence it
> then the new licence must either be an open source licence or the
> references to the GPL'd code must be removed.
The new license must be the GNU GPL, or references to the GPLd code must
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
Evangelist, Opensales, Inc. http://www.opensales.org
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Debian GNU/Linux rocks!
http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ K5: http://www.kuro5hin.org
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20000814/415976e4/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists