This is the mail archive of the gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GSL project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: qawo-problem and a book project


Hi listers,

	Sorry to weigh in uninvited and I'm especially sorry if I don't
understand the question being asked but ... As I see it the question is
"can the programs that USE (link with) gsl be included with the book
WITHOUT distributing the GSL"? Is this right? If this IS the question I'm
sure that the answer is YES -- you can write a book using gsl names
WITHOUT including the GSL (provided you don't crib examples from the GSL
manual or do some other copyright violation). Essentially the text of the
programs are only programs that use things like "#include <gsl/...>" and
"gsl_vector_get(...". Someone can freely use those identifiers -- or
generate a proprietary GSL compliant interface using those
identifiers. IF the author distributed the compiled version of the code
snippets, that would require him (the author) to link against the GSL and
thus it would be a violation of the GPL if he didn't GPL the code
snippets (at least that is the common interpretation of how the court
will see the GPL if, and when, it's tested in court).

	As a comment, i'd like to send a message to the GSL leadership
about this issue. I'm as big a GPL fan as anyone on this list. But I think
that, even if it where a GPL violation to include code snippets in the
book text (which I would argue passionately that it isn't), that it would
be in the GSL's interest to be lenient on enforcing this. Authors, don't
want their code snippets to be freely included in other peoples books --
the author worked hard on them. Yet at the same time, Joe average user
still has full view of the code snippets -- thus benefiting both joe user
and the book author. By being lenient, the GSL could increases the
likelihood of authors basing their text on the GSL -- thus raising the
visibility of the GSL. I think everybody wins in this scenario.

Ok, that's enough out of me. Sorry if I'm off base.

Pete


On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Brian Gough wrote:

> M Atakan Gurkan writes:
>  > Is this really true? If I write a program and use GSL routines in
>  > it and distribute only the source, as it would be in a book, I am
>  > not copying GSL but only using it. I thought one needed to provide
>  > the program under GPL if that program _includes_ GPL'ed code to
>  > some extent. The source, possibly, does not contain GPL'ed code.
> 
> Copyright law considers "derivative works" rather than inclusion, and
> if the program needs to use GSL then it's a derivative work.
> 
> best regards
> -- 
> Brian
> 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]