Re: IDL dependency tracking
- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>
- To: dahaverk rockwellcollins com
- Cc: orbit-list gnome org, Mark McLoughlin <mark skynet ie>,Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>, gnome-2-0-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: IDL dependency tracking
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:24:56 -0700
On 15Aug2001 12:00PM (-0500), email@example.com wrote:
> Just thought I would throw in my 2cents on this. I don't want the license
> in anyway to cause someone that is developing software to have to give away
> the source to their application unless they want to. Since the IDL
> stubs/skels are included into a delivered application, any license on the
> generated code should fall under something more like the "Artistic"
> license. The code for the IDL compiler etc should be GPL'ed. This way,
> any changes or improvements to the IDL compiler and Stubs/Skels can be
> freely given back to the community, and the Programmer/Company retains the
> rights to the Application code they develop.
> Of course usage of the GNU "gettext" in ORBit already corrupts this idea.
> I can already see that some company lawyers will have developers re-write
> (re-invent) some Open-Source software to avoid having to give away the
> company "Domain Knowledge".
We were actually talking about the license in the individual source
files, not the license on generated code. But I think you are right
that as with bison or flex, we should be explicit about the fact that
generated code is *not* GPL.
] [Thread Prev