Ken Arromdee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Andrew Suffield wrote: >> I find a decent smoke test for aggregation to be: >> >> Can I take these two packages on the same CD and split them apart >> again, such that they are no longer aggregated, and still use them? > > This definition suggests that all Emacs macros are derived from Emacs, that > all Perl scripts are derived from Perl, and of course that any document > written in Microsoft Word is derived from Word.
No, it suggests that Emacs macros shipped with Emacs are a combined work -- especially if the macros are shipped in Emacs' load-path. Perl scripts shipped with perl are a combined work, just like C programs shipped with libc are a combined work. This all is exactly what the OS-exception is for -- so that runtime code libraries and interpreters didn't get dragged around by the GPL too, unless you're the OS vendor. Debian is an OS vendor. Eit. -Brian Oh, and Word? I don't think I'd call a Word Doc and MS Word a combined work, or MS Word part of the Source, unless OO.o or AbiWord really couldn't open it. There's a fuzzy line between interpreters and rich document formats, but I think Word is mostly still on the "document format" side of that line. -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
