From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public From: kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Subject: Re: GLADE and GPL (was: what DOES the GPL really say?) Date: 1997/06/28 Message-ID: <5p1tva$2cq$1@news.nyu.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 253109068 References: <5ousck$6rj@kiwi.ics.uci.edu> <5p0eum$1293$1@prime.imagin.net> <5p1s2l$2a2$1@news.nyu.edu> Organization: New York University Ultracomputer Research Lab Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss Date: 1997-06-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <5p1s2l$2a2$1@news.nyu.edu> kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes: >In article <5p0eum$1293$1@prime.imagin.net> dweller@news.imagin.net (David Weller) writes: >>The Library GPL and the "ACT exception" to the LGPL are two licensing >>terms that fall between (if the GNU folks will permit me this >>comparison) the GPL and the ACL. > >First of all, the exception being referred to is an exception to the >LGPL, not the GPL. Oops! As should have been obvious, since I was making a *correction* to the original statement, I meant to say that it was an exception to the GPL, not the LGPL, as was claimed.