On Apr 9, 2005 1:58 PM, Jim Starkey <jas@...> wrote:

>
> Alexander Klenin wrote:
>
> >On Apr 9, 2005 2:06 AM, Ann W. Harrison <aharrison@...> wrote:
> >
> >>>Not true. By excluding developers who prefer to license their work
> >>>under GPL, he did exclude whole lot of developers, just different ones
> >>>than those who are excluded by GPL.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>How so? The Free Software Foundation considers BSD a compatible license
> >> so BSD-licensed code can ship as part of an overall GPL product.
> >>Who's excluded?
> >>
> If you follow your link, you will find that IPL and IDPL are legally
> incompatible with GPL, and linking a program containing code from each
> is illegal. This is assinine, but expected.

Jim, please, count greater-then signs carefully when you reply ;-)
The question you quoted was by Ann, not me. So your following
arguments are somewhat confused and misdirected. Anyway:

>If you use GPL, you can't use Firebird.

Huh? Sorry, this sounds like some random FUD. Neither GPL nor IPL
imposes any restriction on usage of covered software.

>Firebird doesn't care, but the "Free" Software Foundation may sue you.

Actually, Firebird does (or should) care. Incorporating IPL-covered
code into GPLed work does violate IPL just as well as the reverse
violates GPL. So the licenses are incompatible in both directions (as
opposed to, say, revised BSD license which is one-way compatible with
practically anything).