RetroSearch Browse

Sat Jan 28 11:06:01 CET 2006 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-January/060180.html

On 28-jan-2006, at 0:53, Martin v. Löwis wrote:

> Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>> Merging the two configure files might be a good idea anyway, that   
>> would
>> take away the need to run configure from setup.py. IANAL, but I   
>> don't
>> quite get how a GPL'd support script, if there is such a thing,   
>> in the
>> build machinery of an extension library would require that  Python
>> itself is GPL'd.
>
> Section 2b) of the GPL. If a part of the program is GPL, the entire
> program must be. Also, you must include the entire source of the
> program, including all build scripts (section 3). So just including  
> the
> generated configure, and omitting some of its input, would also be a
> license violation.

You have a point there.  I'm not entirely convinced though, the argument
that Python would be a derived work of libffi's aclocal.m4 when libffi
were included in the Python repository seems very weak to me.

It is a good argument to just drop libffi's configure script and  
integrate
the functionality of it in the main python configure script. That would
remove all possible doubt and shouldn't be too much work.

BTW. The argument that the readline module should be GPL licensed seems
rather stronger, it's designed to work with a GPL-ed library and doesn't
work with a BSD licensed work-alike of that library.

Ronald

>
> Regards,
> Martin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2157 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060128/c1a198bd/attachment-0001.bin 

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-January/060180.html below:

python-dev Summary for 2006-01-01 through 2006-01-15