Re: GPL V2 and GPLv3
> > If it explicitely calls the interface...
>
> ... that does not resolve the question, even for bytecompiled files.
So why do need the freer LGPL versus the GPL for libraries? I guess we
can do whatever we want so it doesn't matter.
>>> In this case, there are older emacsen -- distributed under licenses
>>> other than the GPLv3 -- that provide the interfaces needed by most or
>>> all of the elisp in question.
>>
>> Sure, the code is fine with older Emacs. We simply shouldn't install it
>> and set it up for GPL v3 versions of Emacs.
>
>I suggest you take this question up with the FSF. If their position
>is that there is a license conflict between GPLv2-only elisp files and
>a GPLv3 (or later) installation of GNU Emacs, it is worth talking
>about -- in part because there would be wider-ranging implications.
The FSF have stated that the two licenses are not compatible.
In the past, I had asked RMS if it was reasonable that elisp code could
be under any license if it simply used Emacs builtins, and would have to
be under the GPL if it pulled in GPL'ed libraries using a `load' or
`require'. He agreed that it made sense, because the libraries weren't
under the LGPL but under the GPL. Transpose that to the incompatible v2
or v3 and you get the same situation.
>So far, though, you seem to be the only one with that opinion, and you
>have not provided any support for it beyond assertion.
Wow, I didn't think it was controversial thinking. I'm simply seeking
advice here, not trying to change the world.
The point for me isn't the letter of law but the intent of the license
and the code's author. I can understand perfectly if someone didn't
want to give a blank cheque and specify "GPL version 2 or any later
version" for their code because they'd rather decide that when the new
version actually comes out. By that token, code that isn't compatibly
licensed won't be enabled "by me" in the packages that I maintain,
because I consider elisp files as GPL'ed libraries. You can chose to do
whatever you want.
Hopes this helps to clarify where I come from.
--
Peter
Reply to: