2009/08/27 0:13, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> I am not sure how Fedra project think, but there's no such thing as
> Ruby's license independent from GPL.  It's always dual licensed, so as
> a whole it's always GPL compatible (at least to GPLv2).  It's already
> known to FSF, see the compatibility note from them (I don't remember
> the URL right now).

I interpretd this paragraph says,
Ruby's License is alyways GPLv2 compat.

> b) note that
> readline extension can be distributed by GPLv3 as well (triple
> license).

If the readline is GPLv3 and readline extension is linked to it,
the extension must be GPLv3 compat.
If the readline extension is GPLv3 and the extension is linked to Ruby,
Ruby must be GPLv3 compat.

b) is not acceptable.

-- 
NARUSE, Yui  <naruse / airemix.jp>