Re: [Maxima] Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: [gnu.org #48656] Re: GCL compliance with GNU GPL

[Richard Stallman]

We should think seriously about switching GCL to the GPL,
not assume that the goal is to avoid this.

    2) I am concerned with free software authors who might insist for some
       reason on a BSD-like license.  Specifically axiom.

Would they have any particular rational reason for thinking they need
this?  Note that we have no intention of changing to either of the BSD
licenses.

    3) I feel that any 'predominant' free compiler for a given language
       will likely not restrict the license of code merely compiled with
       it.

That is true in any case.  Code compiled with GCL's compiler is
copyright by its author, not by the copyright holders of GCL.

    6) Its obviously not right to use emacs' unexec under the LGPL without
       special permission.  I'm confused as to how this situation arose.
       I find some unexec files in the May 10 1994 release of gcl-1.0.
       Did Dr. Schelter ever discuss this with you or any other emacs
       developers? 

Alas, there is no chance I would remember after ten years, sorry.