Re: Re: GPL V2 and GPLv3
>> Wow. I don't think I could disagree more. Loading the library
>> presumably means we are going to invoke some of its code. So you are
>> saying that an interpreter under any non-free license can use any GPL'ed
> That is not at all what he said. The test for whether work A is a
> derivative work of work B does not look at programmatic linking or the
> mechanism for doing that.
> If program A depends on some interface, and program B is only one of
> several programs that implement that interface, A probably is not a
> derivative work of B.
If it explicitely calls the interface...
> 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.
> It is clearly absurd to say that a work
> written a year (or five years) ago depends on a GPLv3-licensed version
> of emacs; there was no such thing when the older work was written.
Yet it is also absurd to _assume_ that someone that licensed some work
under the GPL v2 only meant that any later v3 will do. Respect the licensor's
Peter S Galbraith <firstname.lastname@example.org>