On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 18:39, Ned Konz wrote:
> He had talked to RMS who thought that our situation was more like 
> using library routines than loading programs into an operating system 
> (and therefore loading a SM package that was under the GPL would 
> infect all of Squeak).
> 
First, RMS is a SOB that is always talking to his political agenda.
Don't believe him (yes, I like and support his political agenda and he's
a nice guy if you manage to accomplish the impossible fact of aligning
100% with him; I've got some flameish exchanges with him in my mail
archive as proof that I didn't manage to pass that test ;-)).

The GPL, as it stands now, gets viral as soon as you redistribute it. So
if people load SM stuff, or even redistribute packages that load SM
stuff upon installation, RMS might argue for all his worth that that
constitutes linking, but I'd be more than happy to ignore that, err,
'advice'. It's the same method e.g. Debian uses to fetch some non-free
packages, they simply package up something that grabs the package on
installation. 

Incidentally, this 'on redistribution only' is a weakness in the web
world, because powering a website with GPL'ed code is not considered
redistribution. So companies all over the place embrace-and-extend GNU
software without 'paying back' with the sources to their changes...

IOW, I'm completely fine with *any* license on SM. Even a license that
says 'if you download this, you need to send me $1000'. After all, I'm
free not to use software on SM, we'll extend SM to include client-side
configuration on what licenses you find acceptable, etcetera. SM is just
the library's card catalog, not the books themselves.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20030327/c4ae9455/attachment.pgp