On 7/29/07, Alec Mihailovs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: "Bobby Moretti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> Well, I wouldn't call SAGE a single program. > > > > The issue is complicated, and I doubt a lawyer would agree. > > > > Besides, that's exactly what > >> commercial CAS's do. In particular, Maple includes gmp and a series of > >> other > >> programs under separate licenses. > > > > gmp is licensed under the GNU LGPL, which is GPL without the linking > > requirements, so Maple can do what they want, as long as they don't > > modify GMP. If they modify GMP, then they have to publish their > > changes under the LGPL, but they can leave the maple core alone. > > I agree that including gmp in Maple wasn't a good example. Nevertheless, > SAGE AFAICT is a distribution of various programs rather than a single > program. Something like, say, TEX Live, that doesn't have a single license, > see http://www.tug.org/texlive/LICENSE.TL
It would be one thing if SAGE was just a distribution of software, with a package management system. But SAGE contains (lots) of code that wraps these libraries and provides a unified interface to them. I'm fairly confident that this falls under the GPL's concept of 'linking'. > Alec > > > > > -- Bobby Moretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
