Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Toby Speight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I believe I chose GPL v2 for the above (I have a healthy distrust of > > making commitments to future unknowns). > > It seems vaguely absurd to worry about such things given the small size > of the package.
I don't know, I also dislike giving a blank cheque to anyone, including the FSF. Although for elisp code that you write for Emacs, the code won't be of any use if its license is not compatible. It's like saying that you dislike the version 3 so much that you'll let your code die instead of follwing the train. I thought this was a fairly clear-cut issue, but people on -legal seem to be saying that you can use a (possibly interpreted instead of linked) GPL'ed library with code of any license, so there's no problem. So much for needing the LGPL. Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
