Re: Circlemud/diku Licence

From: George Greer (
Date: 07/22/00

On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, Mysidia wrote:

>   The GPL is evil though and highly politically-motivated to not-only
>   to disadvantage closed-source things but to have all Open source
>   code licensed under it; my recommendation would be, if you're gonna
>   relicense it, best to use the LGPL.

Evil is debatable, politcally-motivated isn't much.  It depends on whether
you agree with the motive.

>   The GPL would prevent you from creating and distributing binary copies
>   where they are linked against libraries not under the GPL, such as
>   libc on some systems, and some other libraries; although GPL'd
>   variants of many such libraries for most OSes are available now, it
>   can be an annoyance -- take special note, when compiling on a Win32
>   system you could only legally distribute .exe files that include GPL'd
>   components when -all- components are GPL'd, most of the time this is
>   not the case -- most compilers link against proprietary libraries to
>   generate .exe files.

Nope, sorry:

--- 8< --- 8< ---
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it.  For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
control compilation and installation of the executable.  However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable.
--- 8< --- 8< ---

Can we please not debate licenses? The chance of it actually changing is
really slim anyway.

George Greer

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     |  |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/01 PDT