On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto<matz / ruby-lang.org> wro=
te:
> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: [ruby-core:25461] Re: [Feature #2032] Change the license =
to "GPLv2+ =A0 =A0 or Ruby's original"."
> =A0 =A0on Tue, 8 Sep 2009 07:35:38 +0900, Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown@=
gmail.com> writes:
>
> |> And as Shyouhei said, I am afraid that the following can have a licens=
e problem.
> |> $ ruby -r readline -r openssl
> |> Because ... <snip>
> |
> |I think this all makes sense. =A0If you switch to MIT/BSD this problem
> |goes away, so long as you keep in mind that distributors of Ruby are
> |still in effect bound by the terms of the GPL. =A0So you don't gain
> |anything there and still need to be vigilant about linking...
>
> The problem would not go away, since it's conflict between openssl and
> readline.

Got it.  While MIT license of Ruby would make it compatible with GPL2 or GP=
L3,
you still cannot link with both in the same project unless they use
language like GPL2+.

> And, remember the quoted statements are very old (6+ years), I am not
> particularly changing the license right now, unless there will be huge
> gain, valuable more than cumbersome works of changing license.

Yeah, understandable.  Really sounds like a readline alternative is a
good option...

-greg