>>>>> "Raul" == Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Raul> On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 09:16:19AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith Raul> wrote: >> Raul, why are you so quick to dismiss this? You state it like >> it was a matter of fact. Is this documented anywhere? Raul> I didn't dismiss it. [And, what is it that you want Raul> documentation on?] Raul> Look at the situation this way: the GPL restricts the Raul> distribution of emacs, not that of independently written Raul> code. The question asked was whether it was legal to Raul> distribute some non-gpled elisp code -- and the answer has Raul> to have a lot to do with how closely the code is tied to Raul> gpl'd emacs (gnu emacs vs. xemacs, ferinstance). How is this different distributing a version of ripem (sp?) that required GMP? My understanding is that the FSF argued that the distribution was illegal because it had the effect of distributing an application that violated the GPL, by linking non-GPL code to a GPL library. I believe they objected even to source distributions. For details on this situation check the gnu.misc.discuss archives, I think around 1994.