[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libreadline

On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 07:50:00PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> * Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> [020504 19:30]:
> > I believe this is only an issue if we also ship python programs that
> > use both modules.  It may be the case that we do; but simply having both
> > python modules available on the system is not a license conflict, and
> > end-users are even allowed to write programs using both modules; they
> > just can't be distributed with Debian without some resolution to the
> > above issue.

> > If we don't ship any python programs that depend on both SSL socket
> > support and readline support, I believe providing a non-SSL-enabled
> > socket module as the preferred socket module will satisfy the license
> > requirements.  If we have programs that do need both SSL and readline,
> > then something needs to be changed -- either readline must be replaced
> > with editline, or OpenSSL must be replaced with gnutls.

> Well, if you do this:

>     freefly:46> python2.1
>       Python 2.1.3 (#1, Apr 20 2002, 10:14:34) 
>       [GCC 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)] on linux2
>       Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>     >>> import socket

> then both readline and OpenSSL are linked into the Python interpreter.

But a user is within her rights to do that.  Creating a program that
loads both of these libraries is allowed -- distributing it in Debian is

> Now the question seems to be if distributing a package that allows this
> is in violation of the GPL.

Distributing a package that *does* this is in violation of the GPL; that
is, we cannot legally distribute a python script that calls both 'import
socket' and 'import readline'.  But we allow users to do many things
that we ourselves cannot: a user is free to create such a script on his
local machine, and he is free to call 'import socket' from the python

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpPNE6YOdUSW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: