On 2020/05/02 10:04:14, dak wrote: > On 2020/05/02 09:49:44, hahnjo wrote: > > On 2020/05/01 06:28:56, hanwenn wrote: > > > I suggest we make this an option that you have enable explicitly. > > > > done > > > > > If it is enabled, we'd have to change the --license output to say AGPL as > > well. > > > > I thought about this and decided against it: > > 1. LilyPond stays under GPL, even if the whole may be AGPL. > > 2. I don't see a good option to find out the license of the library we link > to. > > 3. It's not our business of giving legal advice. Instead I added a warning to > > the configure option "Beware of licensing implications!" > > If it is a compile time option that actually links stuff (and the headers > suggest that), we should add something like > > This version of LilyPond has been compiled and linked with a version > of Ghostscript licensed under the AGPL.
Please re-read point 2 above. Old Ghostscript versions are not AGPL and other implementations may not be either. https://codereview.appspot.com/548030043/
