Re: git to libgit2 code relicensing
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
- Date
- Nov 15, 2008, 08:04 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811150256140.27509@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <20081115050039.GC2932@spearce.org>
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> David Brown <git@davidb.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 03:46:58PM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > >> In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public License, > >> the authors give you unlimited permission to link the compiled > >> version of this file into combinations with other programs, > >> and to distribute those combinations without any restriction > >> coming from the use of this file. (The General Public License > >> restrictions do apply in other respects; for example, they cover > >> modification of the file, and distribution when not linked into > >> a combined executable.) > > > > Is this license intended to allow static linking but forbid dynamic > > linking into a non-GPL program? It depends on how you interpret > > "linked into a combined executable", but that sounds like it > > intentionally excludes the dynamic case. > > I don't know. When I read it myself I assumed dynamic linking > would also be OK.
libgcc is a dynamic library on most modern systems these days. Yet they routinely execute non-GPL programs. If that text intentionally excluded the dynamic case then every non-GPL applications on such systems would have been breaking the license for a long time. So I don't think anyone could have substance for such a claim.
Nicolas