Re: linking to GPL'd libraries WAS Re: One unclear point in the Vim license
> I am sorry that I upset you. I am not saying that I am
> totally confused, nor that I read the right stuff. It
> is interesting that you claim that I think that "you"
> know better than me, and even more interesting that you
> claim that I think that you are ignorant. If there is
> a more appropriate forum to learn the legal significance
> of debian development and whether it is something that I
> can believe in and share with others, I am very
> interested in finding out.
If you want to decide whether you can believe in it, I would recommend
you take a look at www.gnu.org/philosophy. That's much better than
posting questions which amount to "gee, I wonder whether there's a way
to get around the GPL".
The short answer is: "as far as we know, no".
The medium-long answer is: "as far as we know, no; if there is
something that does get around it, we want to know, in such a way that
we can fix it without it being exploitet, so post your question
somewhere less public."
The long answer is: "Here are a jillion things that people have
dreamed up, and I can address them one at a time."
I'm not willing to do the long one. I'm willing to do the short one:
If you are not just trolling, then post a real-world case, involving
software, and someone (maybe even me) can explain the application of
the GPL to your case.
> Now, I am really confused as I believe that it is
> related to the reason why the ?majority? believe that
> vim cannot be packaged in debian.
The case of vim is still being discussed. Leave that aside for the