[Kaffe] can the classpath project be used with Kaffe.

[Alex Nicolaou]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> On Feb 10, 1999, Alex Nicolaou <anicolao at mud.cgl.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> 
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> >> Classpath is LGPL, so we're free to merge it in, by making it GPLed or
> >> not.
> 
> > This is false. As I said in my other post, if you distribute Classpath
> > and Kaffe together you are required to use clause (3) of the LGPL to
> > convert your distribution of Classpath to GPL.
> 
> Then how come it is fine to use public domain or XFree-like-licensed
> code in a GPLed program?  These license are both more permissive than
> GPL, as is LGPL, so there isn't be any problem in using them in a
> GPLed program, because it is possible to freely distribute their
> source code.  Item 2b implies that the derived work must be licensed
> ``as a whole under the GPL'', but I understand that parts of it may
> have been released under more permissive licenses (which does not
> include the BSD license, because of the advertisement clause)

I can't find any language in the GPL to support your contention that
"parts of it may have been released under more permissive licenses".
While that may be true (LGPL code as an example) the GPL is very
explicit that code shipped with GPL code must all be under GPL. Where's
the exception you are talking about?

I would even argue that RS probably doesn't *want* to allow mixing more
permissive licenses with GPL code; the whole point of GPL is to give
people an alternative to putting things in the public domain (from where
they can be snatched up by any profit-hungry company, slightly modified,
and resold). Its purpose is to increase the body of ``free'' software,
meaning free from the bonds of proprietary changes, closed source
development, and copyright other than GPL. In Hofstader's terms, it's a
self-protecting meme; the more GPL code there is, the more GPL code
there'll be, because the license transfers to any code that builds upon
what's already GPL.

Hmm, we're getting off-track here though, and I'm just feeding the fire.
To send or not to send, that is the question ....

alex

P.S. Sorry, it's late and my judgement may be wrong. I pressed "Send".