<P>Thanks for your response, Matthew.
<P>This is good to know.
<P> <B><I>Matthew Flatt <firstname.lastname@example.org></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">At Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:22:51 -0800 (PST), Shawn Legrand wrote:<BR>> If I create a commercial windows application using Dr Scheme and I<BR>> create a stand-alone executable (where the runtime engine is part of<BR>> the .exe but the DLLs are separate), do I still fall under the<BR>> condition that I have to provide the source or let the consumer<BR>> reverse-engineer my application code?<BR><BR>Certainly not. That's analogous to linking an unmodified glibc into<BR>your application, which would not force you into releasing your code.<BR><BR>Put another way, if you treat DrScheme in pretty much the same way you<BR>treat gcc (i.e., use it as a tool to build applications without<BR>modifying the tool), the licensing result is the same.<BR><BR>Matthew<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Shawn Legrand <br>Carpe Noctem! Carpe Diem! Hieros Gamos!<br>email@example.com