Donating code to Kaffe
gback at cs.utah.edu
Fri Jan 8 20:20:44 PST 1999
> > > Second, we distribute Kaffe under the GPL...
> > > This does not prevent you from using Kaffe to run proprietary
> > > software - we'd like you to make your software open source too but
> > > that's up to you.
> Going back to the beginning of Classpath when we discussed licensing,
> the problem with releasing the class libraries as GPL is the GPL
> doesn't allow one to 'link' proprietary code to those libraries either
> at compile time or runtime. According to what I've heard in the past,
> I believe even from RMS himself, the VM in essence performs this
> 'link' because without those GPL'd libraries the program could not
> function. Because the VM itself is self-contained, it could (and
> should to protect it) be distributed under the GPL. That's what I
> didn't like about Japhar switching from GPL licensing to LGPL, but I
> understand why the developers of Japhar wanted to do it and that's ok.
Which do you think matters more?
Stallman's opinion on how other people should enforce their copyrights
or the stated interpretation of the people who actually licensed the code?
More information about the kaffe