Jay Carlson wrote:
> 
> "Andrew C. Greenberg" <werdna at gate.net> writes at  Sunday, January 23, 2000
> 11:33 PM
> 
> > Yet according to RMS, a GPL library can not be linked with a Squeak
> > plugin, without rendering the entire image in which it is contained
> > subject to GPL restrictions.  Since the licenses are incompatible,
> > the images would then be barred from distribution, and possibly from
> > further use or modification by the person who merged them.
> 
> Sure.  Don't do that!

I don't understand this point: Isn't there just the LGPL to ensure that
gcc could be used for commercial applications?

AFAIK the reason for LGPL is, that the standard libraries necessary for
ANSI-C are linked with the executables and shouldn't infect the user
written program by a GPL license, because that would hinder gcc from
widespread use. With LGPL you only have to give the users of the program
the sources of the LGPL'd libraries if they want to have them, but _not_
the sources which you wrote outside these libs.

And what's about the squeak VM: fileIO, printf() of messages to stdout,
etc.. It seems to be linked with a LGPL'd lib under Linux at least.

> > For my part, Squeak feels a lot more free.
> 
> Squeak really does feel free!
> 

First I've stumbled over the license (especially the Apple fonts
problem), but now I also think that Squeak has a very good license:

It seems to be one of the best licences for
- giving a free base system to all people without any fee,
- ensure that improvements of the base system will flood back to the
community,
- enabling the use of squeak for commercial applications.

The first point attracts many people which don't want to spent money to
make SWE (software engineering) as hobbyist. And sometimes you make SWE
without knowing if it ever brings money: The force to change the
development platform then, if it smells a little bit after money,
frightens people away to use it.

The last point pushes the development of Squeak very much IMHO: 
The developers of commercial application will often have the need for
extending the base system to implement missing or new features, which
are flowing back to the community; and on the other hand they are able
to sell applications with clearly separated (from the base system) parts
and are able to earn money with it. So some commercially paid persons
are in effect using a part of their working time to improve the base
system for all! Isn't it nice!?


Greetings,

Stephan
-- 
Stephan Rudlof (sr at evolgo.de)
   "Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis.
    You can't simply say, 'Today I will be brilliant.'"
    -- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3