Hi Philip,
On Sat, Jun 15 2024, Philip McGrath wrote:
> Therefore, "the entire work, as a whole," would need to be under the
> GPL.
Thank you. That's also the conclusion I came to from several different
angles.
For now, the work remains licensed under the GPL. My work is
Guile-PAM. [1] It's k
Hi Felix,
On 6/13/24 09:56, Felix Lechner wrote:
Hi Arne,
On Thu, Jun 13 2024, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
The rule of thumb is, if you want proprietary software to use your
code, you must choose LGPL.
So I think your code would be part of the corresponding source of the
linked libguile,
(I haven’t figured out how to stop the autocorrupt of names of e-mail addresses
yet – while Jonas Hahnfeld can read this, I don’t have them in mind.)
>> The rule of thumb is, if you want proprietary software to use your
>> code, you must choose LGPL.
>> So I think your code would be part of the
Hi Arne,
On Thu, Jun 13 2024, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> The rule of thumb is, if you want proprietary software to use your
> code, you must choose LGPL.
> So I think your code would be part of the corresponding source of the
> linked libguile, which would propagate the requirements of the G
Felix Lechner via "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library"
writes:
> I would like to release some code under the GPL. libguile.so calls it
> from C. The setup is similar to the code in the Tortoise tutorial. [1]
>
> Guile is licensed under the LGPL, so it is possible for propr
