Kevin Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter, > > Thanks for message. I've forwarded your message to ilisp-devel for > their consideration as well as debian-legal. ILISP has been an > important part of Lisp development for many years, so it is essential > to clarify the issue completely. > > Of course, I think it is the hope of all that ILISP's license can > become DSFG compliant.
Thanks for not getting upset at the messenger. I'm surprised that the authors didn't simply start off using the GPL since it appears that they wanted the code to become part of Emacs down the road. The best way to accomplish such a goal is to start off using the GPL, assign copyright to the FSF (and sign the paperwork), and accept patches only when the contributor is also willing to sign the paperwork. It's tedious, but changing licenses later in the game is difficult when multiple contributors are involved. It's possible that some people won't see loading Emacs code as loading a library. Emacs is an interpreter after all. For my part, I think that using only Emacs builtins might be okay, but using elisp code crosses the line. Unfortunately, the FSF doesn't specifically say anywhere what license elisp code (that load other Emacs code) must use. Even RMS hasn't really thought about the issue. Peter
