[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem
From: |
Ben Pfaff |
Subject: |
Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem |
Date: |
Fri, 02 Dec 2005 09:28:52 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:
> I agree with all this. I've changed gnulib-tool to accept modules whose
> license is "GPLed build tool", and created a csharpcomp-script and
> javacomp-script module under this license. This should make it clear
> that - unlike the automake-provided build tools but exactly like
> texinfo.tex - the tool is GPL but its use as build tool does not
> infect your source with GPL.
I'd expect that the purpose of a module (e.g. as code to compile
and link or as a build tool) is orthogonal to its license. One
could presumably have LGPL'd build tools also. I wonder if there
should be two separate fields.
(In practice, of course, I don't know whether this matters.)
--
Ben Pfaff
email: address@hidden
web: http://benpfaff.org
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, (continued)
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/02
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/02
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/02
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/02
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/03
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/05
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/06
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/03
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/05
- Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/06
Re: Separate csharpcomp.sh, and a license problem,
Ben Pfaff <=