On Mon, Feb 21, 2000 at 10:07:27PM +0200, Adi Stav wrote: > > QPLed code can't be distributed under the GPL. Code which is linked > > into the program is part of the program. What part of that don't you > > understand? > > I can't see how it would allow Troll to re-release GPL code under the > QPL, or (more to the point, as I've agreed that the QPL should not > considered a Free license) how anyone could re-release GPL code under > a different Free license other than the GPL.
Ok, so you've agreed that QPL should not be considered a free license. Wouldn't you then say that if QPLed code is incorporated into a GPLed program that that part of the GPLed program would not be free? > Anyhow, if you consider any Free license a "good enough" license than > additions or mofifications to your code under such a license are also > ok. > But if the QPL is not a Free license, why should it be considered "good enough"? Not sure I'm understanding your point... -- Raul
