On 20 April 2016 at 10:49, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > Quoting Dave Crossland (2016-04-20 15:47:33) > > > https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/FAQ#What_are_the_principles_that_guide_Sugar_Labs.3F > > says > > > > What are the principles that guide Sugar Labs? > > > > Sugar Labs subscribes to principle that learning thrives within a > > culture of freedom of expression, hence it has a natural affinity with > > the free software movement (Please see Principles page in this wiki > > https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs#Principles for more details). > > The core Sugar platform has been developed under a GNU General Public > > License (GPL); individual activities may be under different licenses. > > > > > > That last sentence seems really weird to me, because as I understand > > the GPL, and I Am Not A Lawyer, then if Sugar is GPL, all Activities > > must be under GPL compatible libre software licenses. > > There is _granted_ license of sourcecode, and there is _effective_ > license of combined work. > > An activity with GPL-compatible liberal license (e.g. Expat a.k.a. MIT) > is at runtime effectively GPL if linking with the GPL code. > > Note that e.g. communicating via DBus likely is not judged "linking". > > Liberal license is effective when code is a) reused in source form (e.g. > forked for a BSD-based project), and b) if being granted an alternative > license for the otherwise copyleft-licensed code. >
I agree
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep