Mon 2003-02-10 19:03, Tobias Ernst (2:2476/418.15) wrote to andrew clarke:

 ac> Of course then anyone statically-linking the SMAPI/XMSGAPI would 
 ac> need to provide source code to their program if their executable 
 ac> was publically available, because the GPL considers this a 
 ac> "combined work".  But given that (I assume) everything that uses 
 ac> SMAPI/XMSGAPI is already either GPL or GPL-compatible (eg. BSD 
 ac> or PD), this probably isn't something to be too concerned about.

TE> PD is not at all compatbile. I will be in violation of GPL if I
TE> distributed Msged under a PD-type license when it is linked to a
TE> GPL'ed version of SMAPI.

Not according to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html :

"We classify a license according to certain key questions:

[...]

* Whether it is compatible with the GNU GPL. (This means you can combine
a module which was released under that license with a GPL-covered module
to make one larger program.)

[...]

The following licenses do qualify as free software licenses, and are
compatible with the GNU GPL:

[...]

Public Domain.
Being in the public domain is not a license--rather, it means the
material is not copyrighted and no license is needed. Practically
speaking, though, if a work is in the public domain, it might as well
have an all-permissive non-copyleft free software license. Public domain
status is compatible with the GNU GPL."

Regards
Andrew

-- mail{at}ozzmosis.com

--- timEd/FreeBSD 1.11.a4