Python 2.0b1 is released!

[Emile van Sebille]

"Tim Peters" <tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:LNBBLJKPBEHFEDALKOLCOEDAHFAA.tim_one at email.msn.com...
>
> The FSF would have to take action against someone who
links Python with
> GPL'ed code and makes the result available to others.

I've obviously misunderstood something along the way, but
isn't the point
of GPL'd code in part to "infect" contributed, linked and
derived code such that the result be made available to
others?  Yet this is what would happen with python, and
they'd have to take action?

> "Action" needn't be
> legal, and indeed hasn't been yet, although it's *based*
on legalities.
> They can't just let it slide:  the GPL is FSF's core tool,
so they can't
> afford to let anyone thumb their nose at it.  Their
disagreement now is with
> CNRI; if it's not resolved, their *fight* will be with
Python programmers
> who take CNRI's side.

>From a practical legal perspective, isn't it that anyone can
download any of the variously licensed open source software
and use them in any way for their own or company use *other
than re-distribution*?

Sigh, It's beyond me.  ;-)

We-know-what-you-are-now-we're-talking-price-ly y'rs,

--

Emile van Sebille
emile at fenx.com
-------------------