[Chicago-talk] Perl binaries
Michael D. Stemle, Jr.
manchicken at notsosoft.net
Fri Oct 27 13:31:27 PDT 2006
On Friday 27 October 2006 15:24, johnnnnnnn wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 12:43:33PM -0500, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
> > It's not. This is why RMS doesn't like the Perl license; it
> > explicitly allows for binary-only distribution:
> Ok. That's what i thought.
> > If, as a Free Software author, you want people using your library to
> > open source their application, license your module ONLY under the
> > GPL. Then binary-only redistribution becomes illegal (as long as
> > you have enough money to successfully sue the infringer, which you
> > probably don't).
Naw, FSF has folks who'll help you out if you notice GPL compliance issues.
> I generally land on the BSD side of the license debate, so it's no big
> deal to me.
> Chicago-talk mailing list
> Chicago-talk at pm.org
~ Michael D. Stemle, Jr. <><
(A)bort, (R)etry, (I)nfluence with large hammer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.pm.org/pipermail/chicago-talk/attachments/20061027/ef460af2/attachment.bin
More information about the Chicago-talk