John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote: > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to appear in > GPL projects, but it requires that code then to be distributed under > the GPL.
Actually, the later is not completly true. The _author_ of the GPL code is not able to violate his own copyright. Therefore, he does not if he adds code not distributable under the GPL. Unless the license of the non-GPL code prohibits this combination, everything is ok for him. By doing this, the author also implicitly gives a license that contains an exception to the GPL, which allows distributing the resulting binaries. The code actually is under a GPL-with-exception license. Of course, this has some implications: . The license grant is incorrectly worded as it's missing the implicit exception. This is very confusing. Better add an explicit exception notice. . Distributing binaries built from modified source (or built by other persons) may or may not be allowed, depending on the venue. This means the software fails to meet the DFSG. Only an explicit exception notice that grants that right can remedy that. . GPL code from third parties can't be included because its license lacks the exception necessary to distribute binaries. (NB: The source code might still be distributable as seperate packages.) The software can still meet the DFSG, its license is just incompatible with the GPL. Claus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
