On Jun 1, 6:01 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 8:51 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<SNIP> Hi, > I really hope Maxima is not GPL V2 only, since: > (1) that would mean we couldn't distribute it with Sage, Obviously: IANAL and I don't play one on TV ;) Yes, we can since we do not link against Maxima. We build Maxima with clisp which is a byte code interpreter, so no funny linking going on here either. And even if Maxima were GPL V2 you can still stick a GPL V3 and a GPL V2 binary in the same archive without it violating the GPL provided either binary does fulfill the license terms of the GPL V2 and GPL V3 respectively. > (2) that would mean that we messed up when we did our last license audit. > > In fact looking through the actual source code, it mostly says > "Copyright William F. Schelter" or "See the GNU General Public > License for more details. You should have received a copy of > the GNU General Public License." The top level of the maxima > distribution contains the standard GPLv2 license file, which > is "GPLv2+", since it contains the phrase "If the Program does > not specify a version number of this License, you may choose > any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." > If anybody is a lawyer, please clarify, since IANAL. If that were the case Maxima *is* GPL V2+. > -- William Cheers, Michael --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
