Re: Eclipse 3.0 Running ILLEGALY on Kaffe

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> wrote:
> Brian Sniffen wrote:
> >
> >Ignore the GPL FAQ for a minute and look at the GPL's 2b:
> >
> >    b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
> >    whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
> >    part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
> >    parties under the terms of this License.
> >
> >The Debian OS contains Kaffe.  So the Debian OS as a whole must be
> >licensed under the terms of the GPL.  There are two exceptions to
> >this:
> >
> >First, there's a separation exception:
> >
> >  If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the
> >  Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate
> >  works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply
> >  to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.
> >
> >This means that it's fine for Kaffe and Eclipse to be distributed
> >separately.  But it's not OK to throw them both on a CD and label it
> >"Debian OS", if running eclipse loads a program made out of copies of
> >Kaffe and Eclipse.
> 
> That's some strong crack you've been smoking Brian; I'd give it a rest
> for a while. Your interpretation of how applications, libraries and
> the kernel live together is *special*.

Not that special.  His argument makes sense to me.  If Kaffe is
required for Eclipse to run, then it looks like a whole work to me.
However, Kaffe is not the only JVM that can run Eclipse.  But it is
the only one in main.  That is why Eclipse needs to stay in contrib.

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu