On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:40 AM, oliver <oli...@first.in-berlin.de> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:34:38AM -0500, Jeffrey Ryan wrote: > [...] >> My case is a bit more subtle, as the code that I am writing makes no >> use of any GPL code, aside from the compilation and linking to allow >> GPL "R" code to access it. > [...] > > Just ask people from the FSF, if your issue is complicated. > > Or ask the owner of the nmon-GPLed code, if it is possible > to make it open for your project. > > That does not necessarily mean that the same code in olther > products of the company also needs to become open. > > It's possible to make a "fork". > > You just can't make GPLed code again closed.
Right. I understand that perfectly. So likely a tarball with varying licenses *might* be ok, even if all are not GPL compatible - since one file wouldn't affect the other. The final compiled work though would have to be GPLd though, since you couldn't hide the GPLd sections under another license. Seems to make sense to me. And the end-user would have to compile it to have it work, and would need to carry a GPL license... yikes what a mess. I think the external library via an additional download is likely the simplest and safest route all around. Best, Jeff > > > Ciao, > Oliver > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > -- Jeffrey Ryan jeffrey.r...@lemnica.com www.lemnica.com www.esotericR.com ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
