-----Original Message----- From: Ed Heil [mailto:uncorrected@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:05 AM
I understand that one of the big behind-the-scenes projects that the FSF and their lawyers are working on for future versions of the GPL is a better and more general set of definitions for the "linking" issue. They understand that the license is really written with C in mind and gets less and less comprehensible as your programming model departs from a Unix/C like programming model, but it's not a problem that has an obvious and easy solution.
It seems to me that the GPL is roughly equivalent to the old Soviet Union ("Anything not forbidden is mandatory"), while the MIT license is more like the U.S. ("Do what you want, but don't blame us if you get hurt"). SqueakL reminds me a bit of socialism ("We're from the government and we're here to help you"), while most commercial licenses are rather dictatorial ("We are in control! You have no rights!"). Just an observation...
Bob Jarvis Compuware @ Timken