Re: DFSG Par. 9 and GPL "Virulogical" effekt
On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 05:41:59PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 05:18:14PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > the DFSG Paragraph 9 says:
> >
> > 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
> > [...]
> > A restriction could be that you have to publish all "parts" of the program
> > under the same license as the GPL says - This Discussion has been fought
> > in the QT vs. GPL debate and has ended in QPL and GPL not be compatible
> > which in my eyes shows the "Contamination" of QT from GPL based programs.
>
> Note that it says Other Software. This refers to other programs on the same
> medium. Not to source code that is put together to form one software program
> such as is the case in a program that is derived from both GPL and QT code.
Read your quote: "License Must Not Contaminate Other Software"
> Note that Debian does contain -seperate- programs that are distributed under
> the GPL and programs that are distributed under the QT, just no programs that
> can be seen as being distributed under both the GPL and the QT license
> such as when they are derived from both GPL and QT covered code - except when
The paragraph says "License Must NOT Contaminate Other Software".
As Debian and the FSF agree that the GPL and QPL are incompatible
and this is mainly the cause of the GPL which requires "the whole work"
distributed under "THIS license" this means a contamination into other
"programs" read: QT2
Flo
--
Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-subject-2-change
"Technology is a constant battle between manufacturers producing bigger and
more idiot-proof systems and nature producing bigger and better idiots."
Reply to: