[plt-scheme] License question

From: Greg Johnston (greg.johnston at gmail.com)
Date: Fri Mar 9 23:30:11 EST 2007

On 3/9/07, John Clements <clements at brinckerhoff.org> wrote:
> I don't see a response on the list, so perhaps others were also
> confused by your message.  Are you suggesting that the automatic
> inclusion of (require)'d libraries into the executable renders your
> code a part of the executable and therefore that the LGPL requires
> you to distribute it?  My understanding (I'm approximately 25%
> certain of this) is that this is not the case (though it might be
> with the "real" GPL), and that you're free to distribute an
> executable that includes your compiled code along with the DrScheme
> compiled code _without_ making your source code freely accessible.
> Again: LGPL != GPL.  But you knew that already, right?
> IANAL, etc...

Cool. I completely understand that YANAL (me either...hence the
question :-p ) but does the group at large (particularly PLT
developers) believe that it is fair to suggest that I might do this
without being hung, quartered, and drawn?


Posted on the users mailing list.