On 8/30/07, Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Something fuzzily along the lines that all code emitted by these tools
> are, by that action alone, released to the public domain with no licensing
> requirements or constraints whatever? After all, they are sufficiently
> convoluted that I certa
Eric,
Sounds good - thanks very much!
H
This is the first I've seen on this thread.
I have heard that GPLv3 is viral/invasive.
The short question I have is:
If automake/autoconf use GPLv3, will I be able to use them for packages
that are NOT GPLv3?
IE, if GPLv3 is viral/invasive, I cannot use software covered by GPLv3
for most of t
On 8/29/07, Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > The short question I have is:
> >
> > If automake/autoconf use GPLv3, will I be able to use them for packages
> > that are NOT GPLv3?
>
> The goal is YES. Remember, with autoconf 2.61 and automake 1.10, bo
