Yes, we have been through this before.<br><br>The answer we have got from the FSF is that GPL compatible licenses are OK for *all* code of frontends using the library, but of course the whole thing has to operate under the GPLv2 (so you can't get round GPL restrictions by using a compatible license on the frontend).<br>
<br>Just out of curiosity, what GPLv2 only non-crosswire code is there? I can't see any with a quick look.<br><br clear="all">God Bless,<br>Ben<br>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Multitudes, multitudes,<br> in the valley of decision!<br>For the day of the LORD is near<br> in the valley of decision.<br><br>Giôên 3:14 (ESV)<br><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Famile von Kaehne <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:refdoc@gmx.net">refdoc@gmx.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Greg,<br>
<br>
<br>
We have been on teh mailing list through this discussion already a few<br>
dozen of times.<br>
<br>
<br>
If you write GUI code for _a_ bible programme and then go looking for a<br>
suitable backend, + decide to go for libsword your initial independent<br>
GUI code may be under any licence you see fit as long as it is GPL<br>
compatible, your glue code must be GPL and the overall application must<br>
be GPL. The best example within the fold of sword related programmes is<br>
LCD Bible. The guy who wrote it republished his GUI with a couple of<br>
other backends and some of these are not GPL but closed source. His<br>
originl fronend code may be under whatever license, but he needed to<br>
relicence everything as GPL prior to publishing.<br>
<br>
<br>
If you start out with libsword and build your code upon that then you<br>
start out under GPL and continue. If you end up incorporating<br>
pre-existing code from something else, then this (as above) may be under<br>
any other GPL compatible license and the overall final product will be<br>
again GPL.<br>
<br>
<br>
There are a few outlying cases which have been raised a few times and a<br>
couple of people suggested ingenuous sever/client constructions which<br>
they felt would allow them to bypass the overall GPL but thgese are the<br>
exceptions (which might not even apply if you set a lawyer onto it.<br>
<br>
<br>
The main confusing aspect is "GPL compatible". This can mean two things<br>
<br>
<br>
a) a license which is free enough to allow code under it be incorporated<br>
into GPL code.<br>
<br>
<br>
b) a license which states the same as the GPL but uses other words.<br>
<br>
<br>
Latter practically does not exist, but lingers in people's minds and<br>
confuses the issues. Former are BSD amd MIT style free licenses or<br>
indeed public domain code. The "compatibility" is a one way street. I<br>
can incorporate BSD/MIT/PD code into my GPL programme but I can not<br>
incorporate GPL code into my BSD programme without licensing the lot as<br>
a GPL programme.<br>
<br>
<br>
With regard to GPL 2 vs 3 - again this has been raised a few times. The<br>
FSF is pushing GPL 3, but for us this is no option as some of the code<br>
we use is GPL vs 2 only. GPL v2 and v3 are not compatible.<br>
<br>
<br>
yours in him<br>
<br>
<br>
Peter<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
sword-devel mailing list: <a href="mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org">sword-devel@crosswire.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>