Re: Rep:Re: [f-cpu] The last killing argument FOR the GPL licence

[nico <nicolas.boulay@ifrance.com>]

Yann Guidon a écrit :
> 
> hello,
> 
> Michael wrote :
> > Oh no, not THAT discussion again :-(
> Did you think it was over ?
> 
> Nicolas Boulay wrote:
<..>
> > GPL are really well written by lawyer, and it will be hard to be
> > carefull of many different legal point ina new licence.
> 
> GPL was written for computer software (code that is executed
> by a computer) and does not fit the needs of a
> 

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOtherThanSoftware

---

You can apply the GPL to any kind of work, as long as it is clear what
constitutes the "source code" for the work. The GPL defines this as the
preferred form of the work for making changes in it. 

However, for manuals and textbooks, or more generally any sort of work
that is meant to teach a subject, we recommend using the GFDL rather
than the GPL. 

---

There is no problem for it. It was confirm by Mélanie Clément-Fontaine (
a lawyer that work for April,...)



> > Before writing something, it could be nice to have a list of feature not
> > present inside the GPL.
> 
> GPL allows or forbids things that i and Michael don't agree on.
> However, we will reuse the principle of "Copyleft" and keep the
> major points.

Which clauses ? Which points ? Before i don't like GPL because there
isn't any way to mix fcpu core and proprietary code as for Leon (for SOC
design it sound stupid !). The problem are to define the interface. Even
the LPGL isn't clear. So the solution given by the GPL FAQ convince me.

> 
> > nicO

> WHYGEE

nicO
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/