Paul Rubin wrote: > Kent Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>You've lost me here. The server certainly would contain Karrigell >>code, it wouldn't function without it. I don't understand the analogy >>to GCC, the web site is not something that is compiled with >>Karrigell. Karrigell is a library or framework that is an essential >>part of the server. I don't know how I would write the app without >>Karrigell. > > > Let me ask it this way: suppose you used ASP instead. As I understand > ASP, it's like PHP except it's proprietary. Would ASP's license be a > problem? > > Maybe you're using "the server" to encompass too much. If I have an > Apache-based web site, then the web server is Apache. If I have a > Python CGI script that the Apache server runs, the CGI script is not > "the server"--it's an application running under the server. It would > not be affected by the GPL if Apache used the GPL. Karrigell scripts > seem to me to work out about the same way.
You may be right, I don't know. In the case of CherryPy, my code is a bit more intimate with CP than a CGI is with Apache - I import CP modules, subclass CP classes and make calls to CP functions from my code. My guess is a Karrigell-based server would be similar. Where would you draw the line? Suppose I want to use a GPLed library in my Python code, does that mean I have to distribute my code under the GPL if I distribute them together? Kent -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
