On 6 Jan 2005 19:01:46 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: >>Note that the so-called 'viral' nature of GPL code only applies to >>*modifications you make* to the GPL software. The *only* way in which >>your code can be 'infected' by the GPL is if you copy GPL source.
>That's not true -- consider linking to a GPL library. Will someone please explain to me in simple terms what's the difference between linking to LGPLed library and linking to GPLed library - obviously in terms of consequences of what happens to _your_ source code? Because if there isn't any, why bother with distinguishing between the two? Oh, and by the way - since Python bytecode can be relatively easily decompiled to source, could it interpreted to "really" count as source code and not binary? What are the consequences of releasing code _written in Python_ as GPLed? Licenses are frigging cans of worms.. -- It's a man's life in a Python Programming Association. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
