On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote: > On 2011-02-24 21:50, William Stein wrote: >> If you mean that GPL-incompatible components would be added to the >> Windows version of Sage, then this would violate the GPL. Not only >> might there be a fork, there would a copyright violation. > > Really?
Yes. > I'm sure you argued before that spkgs do not have to comply > with Sage's licence (GPLv2+). The *optional* spkg's do not have to comply with the GPLv2+, because they are not distributed with Sage. They are distributed separately. It is a GPL violation to take "Sage + all optional spkg's" (say) and publicly redistribute the combined work. > So I believe that one can indeed write a > commercial spkg for Sage and make money off that. Yes, but that's entirely different than "GPL-incompatible components would be added to the Windows version of Sage". William > > Jeroen. > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
