Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp

[Jacob Bachmeyer]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Jacob Bachmeyer <address@hidden> writes:
>   
> > Emacs is GPL, so it can call into GCC through Guile with no problem.
> > A proprietary tool doing the same gets dropped right into a copyright
> > quagmire.
> >     
>
> Not if it does just the same as Emacs since that means it uses a
> generically useful interface.
>
>   
It has been a while since I last read through the FSF GPL FAQs on this, 
so maybe copyright has been weakened, but I thought that dynamic linking 
does not avoid the GPL.  Guile bindings for operations on GCC's GENERIC 
tree would be broadly useful, but I thought that they would also be 
indisputably derived from GCC, and any program written to use them would 
likewise be seen as deriving from GCC?  Has this reach of copyright been 
reduced?  Or have I always been mistaken?

> > Which leads to another idea that I think may have been mentioned: Does
> > Emacs have the ability to load C plugins from shared objects?
> >     
>
> No, and the reason is again not technical but political: it would make
> Emacs generally useful as a component in compound applications not
> reached by the GPL.
>
>   
Could Emacs require plugins to state compliance with the GPL in order to 
be loaded, like GCC requires?