[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Does using automake+autoconf require my project to be GPL'ed?
From: |
almkglor |
Subject: |
Does using automake+autoconf require my project to be GPL'ed? |
Date: |
Mon, 9 Mar 2009 06:45:09 -0700 (PDT) |
Hello world,
I'm building an open-source project that is currently under a permissive MIT
license. Since the project is getting complex, I'm thinking of using
Automake+Autoconf to help handle portability.
What I'd like to know is, does using Automake+Autoconf require me to license
distributions built using them with the GPL?
>From what I could glean, it's not necessary, provided I write my own
"missing.sh". The other files auto-produced by `automake --foreign
--add-missing' seem to have a clause saying something about distributing
them under a different license.
I'd just like confirmation, because I've tried searching "automake license",
"autoconf license", "autoconf permissive license" etc. and can't find a
definitive "You must absolutely use GPL for your package" or "You can use
any license for your package" or "You can use any GPL-compatible license for
your package".
While GPL is OK by me, it might not be as popular among other developers. ^^
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Does-using-automake%2Bautoconf-require-my-project-to-be-GPL%27ed--tp22409448p22409448.html
Sent from the Gnu - Automake - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Does using automake+autoconf require my project to be GPL'ed?,
almkglor <=