On 12/12/2014 11:44 PM, Ángel González wrote: > Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: >> Dear fellas who know much more about licensing than me. >> >> I might have even asked before (since we are in a similar situation with >> PyMVPA/shogun) but forgot what was the summary: >> >> If we have a library X in Python, released under some GPL-compatible >> license (e.g. BSD-3 or Expat) and then using (optionally) some GPL code >> (at run time) provided by another library Y -- what are the implications? >> Am I wrong on any of the following statements >> >> - the project X codebase doesn't have to be relicensed to GPL >> - the project X can use project Y (since under GPL compatible license) >> >> - It is only at 'run time' when actual linking to the library Y happens, >> so project must comply with GPL but whose responsibility it is then >> and what needs to be enforced? >> >> - original distributor of X must have provided all the sources with >> modifications? But it was user's decision to use GPL'ed library >> >> - or user must somehow make sure he has the sources... (sounds >> dubious) >> >> - is mere ability to be used with GPL licensed library Y makes >> distributors of code of X required to comply with GPL? (e.g. provide >> modified sources) >> >> Thanks in advance for your feedback >> >> [1] http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/nipy-devel/2014-December/010707.html > If the distributor were a distro like Debian IMHO: > - package X can be licensed under Expat > - package Y is licensed under GPL (I would probably add a warning on the description) > > As package X already meets GPL requeriments that's not really a problem. > > However, let's call X' to X + GPL-incompatible changes. > > Then X' and Y couldn't be used together.
>From what I've read (and recall), if both X and Y are independent of each other (X can function without Y, and Y can be used without X), then it is okay for X to be GPL-incompatible -- thus allowing one to develop GPL plug-ins to closed-source programs. However, it appears that the FSF has updated their stance on this issue[1]. You cane substitute "GPL-incompatible" for "non-free" without changing the result, I believe. Of course, Debian differs from FSF on many points, but this supports what Ángel has said. [1]: http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ_Update#Can_I_apply_the_GPL_when_writing_a_plug-in_for_a_non-free_program.3F -- Jonathan Paugh [email protected] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
