Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor packages now on SF

On Sunday 26 July 2009 09:31:10 laseray(a)gmail.com wrote: I am not so sure this is the case. I offer this RMS quote: "Many GNU libraries are covered by the GNU Lesser General Public License, but not all. One GNU library which is covered by the ordinary GNU GPL is Readline, which implements command-line editing. I once found out about a non-free program which was designed to use Readline, and told the developer this was not allowed. He could have taken command-line editing out of the program, but what he actually did was rerelease it under the GPL. Now it is free software." http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/pragmatic.html Notethis program used the GPL readline and was being distributed (I think) and yet RMS calls it a non-Free proram which means it could not have been GPL at that time. Correct? He says that at that point the program's author had options... One of which was taking the command-line editing out of the program and seemingly not making it GPL. The option chosen was to leave in the ability and make it GPL. and these faq links out of interest to others: Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public? http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPu… Does the GPL allow me to distribute a modified or beta version under a nondisclosure agreement? http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowModNDA Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement? http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DevelopChangesUnderNDA all the best, drew