[Mono-devel-list] ByteFX development

[Joshua Tauberer]

Jonathan Pryor wrote:
> The GPL doesn't differentiate between static or dynamic linking.  It
> only cares about linking -- does the GPL'd code exist within your
> process?  If so, then your code *must* be GPL.  Period.
 > ...
> Which begs the question: could communicating with a GPL program over a
> publicly documented protocol be interpreted as "combining two modules
> into one program"?

I really hate to prolong the pseudo-lawyer talk, but an important point 
to be made is this is only an issue if you actually distribute GPLed code.

The part that quoted from the GPL FAQ is about the difference between 
aggregation and combining.  (See Jonathan's link for the difference.) 
To re-paraphrase, it says that aggregated code plus network 
communications may mean you actually have combining.  If you aren't 
aggregating (if you aren't distributing GPLed code to begin with), that 
part of the GPL FAQ doesn't apply.

So if you're not distributing MySQL, and you're not distributing code 
that links with a MySQL-owned library, then you have nothing to worry 
about.  (My understanding is that the (old) ByteFX fits this description 
since it's fully managed, though I haven't looked at the code myself.)

We really need a separate mail list for IANAL discussions since these 
could go on forever.  Email me off-list if you would join a 
mono-ianal at groups.yahoo.com mail list (or if some Mono people want to do 
it instead, or want me not to do it).

-- 
- Joshua Tauberer

http://taubz.for.net

** Nothing Unreal Exists **