On 2016-05-13 10:38, Warren Young wrote:
On May 13, 2016, at 8:02 AM, Ben Altman wrote:
I am not sure what is involved in packaging ksh with Cygwin
I was under the impression that if the licensing wasn't GNU it would be a
problem even though it is open source.
Not exactly. The license merely has to be *compatible* with the GPL as far
as binary distribution goes, since the binaries distributed in the Cygwin
package repo are linked to cygwin1.dll, which is GPL’d.
Please review: https://cygwin.com/licensing.html
Cygwin's license contains a linking exception for software licensed
under terms which satisfy the Open Source Definition
<https://opensource.org/osd>. For our purposes, a good reference is
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main>.
But after taking a peek at the AST license, it’s pretty clear it’s incompatible
with the GPL.
True, but it is Open Source and therefore would be acceptable.
--
Yaakov
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
