Les Mikesell wrote:

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Always Learning wrote:

Yes, in english, 'work as a whole' does mean complete. And the normal
interpretation is that it covers everything linked into the same
process at runtime unless there is an alternate interface-compatible
component with the same feature set.
That may be the USA interpretation but on the other, European, side of
the Atlantic I believe

"as a whole" means generally BUT allowing for exceptions.
OK, great. That clears it up then.

Maybe this helps:

The BSD license does not permit to relicense the code, so you cannot put BSD
code under the GPL. This was e.g. explained by Theo de Raath some years ago
already. The result was that Linux people did remove the GPL header from all
BSDd Linux source files that have not been 100% written by the same person that
added the GPL header.

The BSD license permits to mix a source file under BSD license with some lines
under a different license if you document this. But this is not done in all
cases I am aware of.

Up to now, nobody could explain me how a mixture of GPL and BSD can be legal as
this would require (when following the GPL) to relicense the BSD code under GPL
in order to make the whole be under GPL.

In other words, if you can legally combine BSD code with GPL code, you can do
with GPL and CDDL as well.


  EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
        joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
  URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase