Re: Release status 1.6.1 (2002-05-16)

[Marius Vollmer]

address@hidden writes:

> On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 07:45:06PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > 
> > The intent is more important than the list of files without the
> > exception, I'd say.  The LICENSE file is only there to inform users in
> > a broad and global way, the details can be left to the individual
> > files.
> 
> As i said before, this is not going to work if guile's intent is being 
> used as an embedeable scripting language. If i install libguile9 and
> libguile-dev on Debian i simply don't _get_ the source files. Requesting
> users of type 2 (programmers who embed guile in their application) to
> always scan the sources (and do that regulary) doesn't seem to be a valid
> solution. 

We do not request them to always scan the sources.  We can not change
the fact that it is the individual file itself that determines its
license, if I understand this right.  The file LICENSE can only show
our intent, and a deviation from this intent by any individual file
(that is, a file that is missing the exception) is a bug and needs to
be fixed.  But legally, LICENSE can not change the license of any
individual file.

So, you wouldn't need to scan all files just to find out what our
intent is, but you would have to do this if you want to be find any
bugs in the licensing statements.