[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Licensing of Octave Scripts
|
From: |
Judd Storrs |
|
Subject: |
Re: Licensing of Octave Scripts |
|
Date: |
Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:00:44 -0500 |
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 6:47 AM, David Grundberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> The FSF FAQ is confusing on scripting issues because it is very brief
> and uses a distinct language.
The FSF FAQ is the FSF's interpretation of what the license means.
Personally, I think the FSF's is back-pedalling the scope of the
license in the FAQ in a way that the license does not support. The
distinction between builtin and extension is pretty artificial when
you consider that the GPL permits forking and creation of new derived
software. What was an extension can easily become a builtin in a fork.
--judd