3 ms·
Funnily enough, the current state of the art in understanding GPLv2 is completely opposite (albeit disputed, see SFC vs Canonical on ZFS in Linux). The critica
by p_l 6y ago
Funnily enough, the current state of the art in understanding GPLv2 is completely opposite (albeit disputed, see SFC vs Canonical on ZFS in Linux).
The critical part is whether the software is derived, as that is the language used by GPL, and it can be hard to claim that optional line editor - as many other lisp implementations showed, you can really go far with dumb (loop (print (eval (read))))
However, RMS had an obvious agenda involved, and libreadline was one of the major cugels used by FSF for significant part of 1990s. There's a reason why the term "GPL virality" stuck.
- temac 6y agoI would not say this is "the current state of the art in understanding GPLv2", merely disputed (implying by a minority). A better representation would IMO to say that there is no concensus.
- p_l 6y agoIt's big enough for major projects like FreeBSD and Illumos - and for Linux itself (although due to no copyright assignment other than enforcing GPLv2 instead of "GPLv2 or newer" individual developers can and will dispute it). But ultimately there's no ruling to fall back on, as far as I know all cases ended up without actually getting a court ruling.