[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: E-LISP licensing question
From: |
Glenn Morris |
Subject: |
Re: E-LISP licensing question |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:49:42 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) |
Geoffrey Teale wrote:
> If I write some emacs lisp code does the way emacs deals with that code
> at runtime mean that the code must always be under the GPL?
>
> Or to put it another way...
>
> Does doing (require 'foo.el) link the code into emacs in such a way that
> foo.el must be licensed under the GPL.
I don't really know, but this seems like an important question that
should have a clear answer.
This GPL FAQ seems very relevant, if we consider Emacs as an
interpreter for the Emacs Lisp programming language:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
If a programming language interpreter is released under the GPL,
does that mean programs written to be interpreted by it must be
under GPL-compatible licenses?
I think it's clear that you don't need to license under the GPL
specifically. But you may need to use a GPL-compatible license.
Trying to interpret the answer to that FAQ, it would seem that if you
just write some "pure" Emacs-lisp, you can use whatever license you
like. But if you use any GPL'd elisp libraries, then you need to use a
GPL-compatible license. This raises the question of what we consider
part of the Emacs lisp "language", and what we consider an "extension"
provided by a "library". Perhaps anything not dumped with Emacs is a
"library"? Which means that the requirements could change if a package
starts to be dumped with Emacs...
Can someone give a clear answer to this question?