Re: SWI-Prolog is open source

Jan,

Thanks for clarifying!

Michael


On 4 December 2013 15:42, Jan Wielemaker <[email protected]> wrote:
> Michael,
>
>
> On 12/04/2013 02:10 PM, Michael Ben Yosef wrote:
>>
>> Furthermore, I think we can all agree that making an open source
>> project harder to fork in this sense is not an unreasonable thing to
>> do. Nonetheless, Jan, it would be helpful if you could clarify if that
>> is indeed part of the intent behind SWI-Prolog's special exception as
>> it currently stands. If not, adding a few words to it, to the same
>> effect as those two sentences in the GNU Classpath license above,
>> might help us pedants sleep a bit better at night.:-)
>
>
> This restriction was not intended.  The text was nearly literally
> copied from GCC's runtime library, which also got forked as egcc
> at some point.  It is not on my shortlist, but if someone really
> wants to fork as sees legal problems doing so, I'll help resolving
> these.
>
> The spirit of the license is that anyone can use it as s/he wishes
> but is forced to make modifications to Prolog itself available under
> the same conditions.  I don't even care if people can technically not
> comply with the LGPL linking conditions of the kernel.
>
>         Cheers --- Jan