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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,62a0ce08269e2cbf
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-12 11:40:56 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!btnet-peer0!btnet!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news2-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "chris.danx" <chris.danx@ntlworld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <S0px7.9097$i14.966042@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
 <mailman.1002841518.25069.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <POAx7.2002$oE5.292470@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
 <shFx7.26333$ev2.34845@www.newsranger.com>
Subject: Re: windows bindings
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <8KGx7.6342$oE5.635791@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 19:35:59 +0100
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.252.136.153
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com
X-Trace: news2-win.server.ntlworld.com 1002911748 62.252.136.153 (Fri,
 12 Oct 2001 19:35:48 BST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 19:35:48 BST
Organization: ntlworld News Service
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14429
Date: 2001-10-12T19:35:59+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> >compatibility.  I believe the X (MIT or OpenGroup) license is compatible
> >with the GPL but I wasn't sure how compatible it is with the GMGPL.  Has
>
> The GMGPL is just the GPL with some extra text preventing the "viral"
spread of
> the GPL under certian circumstances. If the GPL is compatable, the GMGPL
should
> be as well.

Ok.

> >anyone wrote a simplified (i.e. not in legal jargon) summary of the GMGPL
> >license that describes what it allows like the ppl have tried to do with
the
> >GPL?

> Sure. I can do it in two sentences. Its the GPL, plus:
>
> As a special exception,  if other files  instantiate  generics from this
> unit, or you link this unit with other files to produce an executable,
> this unit does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be
> covered by the GNU General Public License.  This exception does not
> however invalidate any other reasons why the executable file might be
> covered by the GNU Public License.
>
> That *is* the GMGPL. :-)

Seen it millions of times before just didn't realise this was what ppl here
meant by the GMGPL.