Re: Possibility of Colorer usage (was: php syntax)
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel suse cz>
- To: Pavel Roskin <proski gnu org>
- Cc: Walery Studennikov <despair sama ru>, mc-devel gnome org
- Subject: Re: Possibility of Colorer usage (was: php syntax)
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 09:23:25 +0200
> > > > About the first problem: now colorer uses "Apache Software License".
> > > > Is it acceptable for us?
> > >
> > > I think it's Ok for GPL'd software to link against any libraries, even
> > > against the ones under restrictive commercial licenses (e.g. libc on
> > > Solaris).
> > Its not. GPL has special exception for libc.
> Strange, I could not find this exception.
Here it is:
However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable.
> Anyway, I don't feel that it would be right to switch to Colorer,
> regardless of its license. The internal editor should not be another
Yep, right. I also agree we should try to simplify our editor...
The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel
GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+
] [Thread Prev