[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.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> -johnnnnnnnn
> _______________________________________________
> Chicago-talk mailing list
> Chicago-talk at pm.org
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago-talk

-- 
~ Michael D. Stemle, Jr. <><
(A)bort, (R)etry, (I)nfluence with large hammer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
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 mailing list