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

Re: python 2.0 license

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 10:44:56AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >>From what I've heard, it's not that bad generally. Do you have specific
> > examples of things that break ?
> beopen has a list of incompatibilites.  Several python functions had their
> argument checking tightened.  Some functions allowed: func(foo, bar) when
> they needed a tuple.  Now it is: func((foo,bar)).  That is a biggy.

But first of all, Guido said that this was bad style anyway ;-), and then,
there's a script out there that checks code for these things (don't know how
perfect it works).

Anyway, something else: Could somebody please comment if the following is

- Linking GPL C code with Python2.0 license C code violates the GPL.

+ Linking LGPL C code with Python2.0 license C code is no problem.
  (since the LGPL doesn't infect a greater work)

+ Running GPL Python code on Python2.0 is no problem as well.

+ Running Python2.0 license-style Python code on a GPL Python1.52 would be
  no problem.

I.e. the only problem is where compiled GPL and Python2.0 code will be

Is there an agreement about this ?


Reply to: