From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-07-12T00:05:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby's license

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 1:50 AM
Subject: Re: Ruby's license


> Hi,
>
> In message "Ruby's license"
>     on 03/07/11, "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> writes:
>
> |Does this license actually have a name? Is there any
> |reason we shouldn't call it the Ruby License?
>
> I didn't name it. But you're free to call it Ruby License as long as
> it doesn't confuse anybody.  Note that the license includes the line:
>
>   Ruby is copyrighted free software by Yukihiro Matsumoto
<matz@netlab.jp>.
>   You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the
GPL
>   (see the file GPL), or the conditions below:
>
> So naturally, the license is always dual between GPL and terms in the
> COPYING.

Of course, I had forgotten that. I was so used to
hearing about "Ruby's license" that I had forgotten
its details.

Isn't it the regular expression engine that is GPL?
Or am I mistaken?

Hal