FIXME re: "dynamic linking delayed" to runtime.
The existing text of the Guide hints at this point but doesn't discuss it directly. This FIXME is merely a reminder note to investigate this issue in further detail and perhaps add text here on the question.
This commit is contained in:
parent
eab5efb42b
commit
0adba83923
1 changed files with 19 additions and 0 deletions
19
gpl-lgpl.tex
19
gpl-lgpl.tex
|
@ -1684,6 +1684,25 @@ operating system in order to share libraries for execution efficiency at
|
|||
runtime, or results from runtime references in the language at runtime (as in
|
||||
Java programs).
|
||||
|
||||
% FIXME-SOON:
|
||||
|
||||
% A commonly asked question is whether or not separated distribution (i.e.,
|
||||
% dynamic loading of a module that is expected to be present on the
|
||||
% downstream sytem) triggers the copyleft requirement. The text above
|
||||
% hints at that issue, with reference to Java runtime. However, here would
|
||||
% likely be the natural place to discuss that issue in more depth. I have
|
||||
% never actually studied this specific question in a GPLv2 vs. GPLv3
|
||||
% analysis, and as such I'd want to do that first. Furthermore, the FSF
|
||||
% has not publicly opined on this question to my knowledge, so I'd want to
|
||||
% see possible update to
|
||||
% http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLStaticVsDynamic to mention
|
||||
% this issue before opining about it in the Guide.
|
||||
|
||||
% I'm not aware, BTW, of any dissenting opinions or disagreements among
|
||||
% copyleft advocates on this point. I think it's just a question that is
|
||||
% rarely opined on but often asked, so it's fitting for this Guide to cover
|
||||
% it, and for addition on this point in the FAQ.
|
||||
|
||||
\medskip
|
||||
|
||||
\label{GPLv2s2-at-no-charge}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue