Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-dev:39175] Re: [Bug #2000] Change the license to "GPLv2+ or Ruby's original"."
    on Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:22:44 +0900, "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse / airemix.jp> writes:

|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.

If it's true, life sucks.  I hate licensing issues.  So we have two
GPL software, both respecting the spirit of free software, but still
we have license problem.  ****.

We have to someone to make clear what would happen if we change the
whole license to GPLv2+, or other work around.  I am not going to add
an option to reject GPLv3 to readline, since most people don't add the
option, and would violate GPLv3 without knowing.  That's dishonest.

We really should go to ruby-core.

							matz.