Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: 2.6.8 licensing

[Matt Kaufmann]

Hi, Camm --

By the way, it's not particularly important to me that we distribute a
GCL binary with ACL2.  If we don't, then I don't see how the GCL
license has any effect on ACL2 licensing or distribution (please
correct me if I'm missing something).

Thanks --
Matt
   Cc: address@hidden, Donald Winiecki <address@hidden>
   From: Camm Maguire <address@hidden>
   Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 11:49:39 -0500
   X-SpamAssassin-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0
   X-UTCS-Spam-Status: No, hits=-190 required=165

   Greetings!  OK, that's enough for me -- GCL's migration to LGPLv3
   will not occur until maxima and acl2 choose to do so as well, if
   ever. 

   IMHO, I would encourage both projects to consider this, as the GPLv3
   is actually more flexible in many circumstances.  For example, were
   these systems GPLv3, my understanding is that there would be no
   insistence that all their library dependencies also be v3, unlike the
   case with v2.  v2 is more 'viral' in this sense, and the v3 'upgrade'
   was intended to address this shortcoming.

   Take care,

   Raymond Toy <address@hidden> writes:

   > On 11/5/10 9:52 AM, Camm Maguire wrote:
   >> Greetings, and thanks so much for this!
   >> 
   >> I've been asked to query -- are there any GPLv2 only projects using
   >> GCL?  If so, please now so state.
   >
   > I think maxima is GPLv2 only.  GCL isn't the only Lisp that can be used
   > with maxima, but it has historically been the main lisp used to create
   > binaries.
   >
   > Ray
   >
   >
   > _______________________________________________
   > Gcl-devel mailing list
   > address@hidden
   > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
   >
   >
   >
   >

   -- 
   Camm Maguire                                     address@hidden
   ==========================================================================
   "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah