Any other Python flaws?

[Bruce Sass]

On 20 Jun 2001, Remco Gerlich wrote:
> Tiago Henriques <tiago.henriques at portugal.sun.com> wrote in comp.lang.python:
> > Another annoying missing feature is the absence of command line editing in the
> > python shell. Perhaps now that the license has been made gnu-compatible it will
> > be possible to ship python pre-compiled with the readline library, instead of
> > having to compile python yourself. I have compiled python with readline support
> > myself, and it's pretty easy, but for the average user who is afraid of makefiless
> > and compilations, it would be extra-nice if python were a bit more user-friendly
> > out-of-the-box.
>
> This isn't good, because readline is under the GPL. The only thing that the
> GPL compatibility means is that people are allowed to distribute a version
> of Python with readline compiled in - *under the GPL*.
>
> Python licensed under the GPL would be bad - it couldn't be embedded in
> non-GPL projects anymore.

That is not true.

The GPL can not infect your non-GPLed software just because you use
GPLed software in your project -- even Debian (the pickiest group I
know of) would reject the GPL as non-free if that was the case.

You can not tweak GPLed code then re-license it, it should always be
GPLed.  You can ship someone elses GPLed code with your project, as
long as you make the source (including the source of any tweaks you
made) available.  You can link your non-GPLed code to GPLed code
without getting special permission from the copyright holder, but
there is a grey area if the GPLed stuff was not originally intended to
be linked to; this is where KDE was most recently having GPL troubles,
RMS's opinion was that intent was important and the discussion pretty
much ended.

So...

If you want to use someone's GPLed lib, or GPLed software that
exposes its libs APIs so others can make use of it, in your
proprietary project, make sure you release the source for the libs you
used and for any tweaks you may have made to it.

If you are thinking of *ripping* some pieces out of a GPLed program
and hacking them into your program, then releasing _only_ the source
for the GPLed stuff... hope you still got an asbestos suit kicking
around.


I'm no fan of the GPL, and IANAL, just a Debian user who has taken an
interest in licensing issues (maybe it has something with me also
being a Pine, KDE, and Python user ;)... but I don't see any reason to
fear the GPL, keep it at arms length maybe, but not fear and
avoidance.  Have a look in the "non-free" section of one of the
http://packages.debian.org archives, you will find non-GPLed
stuff that depends on GPLed code (probably most of it!)


- Bruce