From: Eric Lee Green <eric@...>
Date: 2001-11-08T03:33:20+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:24559] Re: Final word on rdtool vs. doxygen licensing

On Wednesday 07 November 2001 11:21 am, you wrote:
> I don't think that's quite true.  Here's an excerpt from the GPL FAQ:
>
> <quote>
> I am writing free software that uses non-free libraries. What legal issues
> come up if I use the GPL?

Uhm, we're not talking about libraries. We're talking about stand-alone 
programs. 

I read the GNU Manifesto when it was brand new. I still have my hardcopy 
printout of the GNU Emacs v10 manual. I've been in this business a long time, 
I've had to consult with lawyers over the years regarding licensing issues of 
this nature, and I'm not going to suggest anything idiotic such as linking to 
a GPL'ed library from non-GPL code. My comment was that there are people with 
ideological axes to grind who go around saying things about the GPL that just 
aren't so, and we need to get away from that axe-grinding and get back to 
work on the technical merits. I don't know whether doxygen would be a good 
solution or not. But we need to evaluate that on its technical merits, not 
because Tom Christianson doesn't like the license on doxygen. 

Eric Lee Green          GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
           mailto:eric@badtux.org  Web: http://www.badtux.org
             You do not save freedom by destroying freedom