Hi,

2010/6/15 mathew <meta / pobox.com>:
> The GNU Public License is *not* an EULA. You do not have to agree to
> it in order to download and use GPL-licensed software. As David Jones
> points out at <http://drj11.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/the-gnu-gpl-is-not-an-eula/>,
> the license itself states that "Activities other than copying,
> distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they
> are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not
> restricted".


I think you are right in your perspective.
But the problem is, "can the core team distribute Ruby?"

We actually distribute Ruby with readline binding.
A user may link the binding with readline6, which we do not intend.
If it is allowed, we can distribute a product using GPLv3 library
with license that is imcompatible with GPLv3, I guess.
Even so, can we distribute Ruby without the note prohibiting such
a link?


IMHO, I agree with your opinion, but I'm not a lawyer.  I cannot
determine.  License issue sucks.

-- 
Yusuke Endoh <mame / tsg.ne.jp>