[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot)
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot) |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Feb 2002 13:27:19 -0700 (MST) |
When one speaks of GPL "compatible", I believe this often is meant as
something else; software that can be used with or linked with software
under the GPL but which is itself under a different and non-conflicting
license. Clearly anything that is "convertable" to the GPL is in effect
compatible as well, although the reverse need not be true.
The reverse does need to be true. The reason is, validly combining
the two programs produces a combination you must release under the
GPL. Thus, making the combination effectively means converting any
parts that have GPL-compatible licenses.
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot, (continued)
- [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), Norbert Bollow, 2002/02/09
- [DotGNU]Re: UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), S11001001, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), Norbert Bollow, 2002/02/14
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), David Sugar, 2002/02/14
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot),
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), David Sugar, 2002/02/16
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/15
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/15
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), David Sugar, 2002/02/14