Re: GPL and scripting languages (here: python2.3-psycopg)
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 11:47:20AM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> i've read the FSF writings about GPL and interpreters multiple times and
> still i don't understand the exact meaning (or even what they would like
> to enforce). _my_ interpretation is that as long as you don't directly
> link with psycopg and only use the python api you're safe. you can write
> and distribute a proprietary python program as long as python and any C
> module calling psycopg are GPL compatible. you can even have proprietary
> C module in python as long as they don't call psycopg code (by "linking"
> i mean linking, not just coexisting in the same address space :)
OK, if this interpretation holds, I'll go on in using
psycopg. Note: RMS explicitly does not allow any GNU Emacs
modes that are not GPLed. GNU Emacs modes are written in
elisp, so the situation might be comparable. Confusion?
W. Borgert <firstname.lastname@example.org>, http://people.debian.org/~debacle/