I think it should be fine. Picolisp is distributed as source code. The code implementing readline can be GPL licensed. The code implementing everything else can be a less restrictive license if desired. Binaries including readline can be distributed as GPL, binaries without readline can be MIT. The README can say, "if you need to use this in an GPL-incompatible way, you have to leave out the readline support file".
The important thing is that we're talking about binaries and source code. A single GPL file in a project does not and cannot relicense all the other files in the project. However, if it is included in the binaries, it affects the license of the binary. This should not be a problem for debian distributions, etc. On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 6:24 AM Alexander Williams <a...@unscramble.co.jp> wrote: > Tomas, you're allowed to relicense the MIT version of PicoLisp you > received, as GPLv3, as long as you maintain the MIT license text. > > > AW > > On Sun, 22 Nov 2020, Tomas Hlavaty wrote: > > > what if i don't want to risk going to court because of this? > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe > -- John Duncan
