пропозиції роботи
Acg N. .
Temat: Open Source w C#
Dla tych, którzy dystrybuują kod interpretowany w programach GPLowych:If a programming language interpreter is released under the GPL, does that mean programs written to be interpreted by it must be under GPL-compatible licenses?
When the interpreter just interprets a language, the answer is no. The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data; a free software license like the GPL, based on copyright law, cannot limit what data you use the interpreter on. You can run it on any data (interpreted program), any way you like, and there are no requirements about licensing that data to anyone.
However, when the interpreter is extended to provide “bindings” to other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses through these bindings. So if these facilities are released under the GPL, the interpreted program that uses them must be released in a GPL-compatible way. The JNI or Java Native Interface is an example of such a binding mechanism; libraries that are accessed in this way are linked dynamically with the Java programs that call them. These libraries are also linked with the interpreter. If the interpreter is linked statically with these libraries, or if it is designed to link dynamically with these specific libraries, then it too needs to be released in a GPL-compatible way.
Another similar and very common case is to provide libraries with the interpreter which are themselves interpreted. For instance, Perl comes with many Perl modules, and a Java implementation comes with many Java classes. These libraries and the programs that call them are always dynamically linked together.
A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules or Java classes in your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way, regardless of the license used in the Perl or Java interpreter that the combined Perl or Java program will run on.
---------------
I historia z życia wzięta (także mojego). Umowy serwisowe i "prekonfiguracja środowiska".
Sure it's free! (Heh, heh.), posted 22 Sep 2004 at 00:58 UTC by MartySchrader »
The way I like to approach this is as follows:
- Client sez, Gee, this here software is free for the download, ain't it?
- Yeah, I sez.
- Well, how come I gotta pay all this moolah to git it installed and configured? client sez.
- Sez I, Well, okay. Here's the RPM file set. Go right on ahead and expand that archive. Then you can install that puppy yer own bad sef. Once you git it all configured and working you let me know and I'll come on out to do the hard part, eh?
This usually puts any objection to charging for installation and configuration to rest. The whole Open Source community is built on this very scenario. If you have the manpower to do it yourself then go right on and do it. If you can't do it yourself then expect to pay me to do it for you.Adrian Olszewski edytował(a) ten post dnia 18.08.11 o godzinie 00:44
