🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <LORD.94Nov2133424@x1.cygnus.com>, lord@x1.cygnus.com (Tom Lord) writes:
> Matthias Neeracher writes:

>  - And finally, as an *extension* language, Gel will be unuseable for
>    commercial programs. [...] The problem is that the Gel
>    *system* will have to be linked into the program to be scripted,
>    and if Gel is copylefted, every scriptable program using it would
>    have to be copylefted.

> This is wrong.  It is Matthias who misunderstood.  The implementation
> of GEL will be usable with proprietary programs.  You will be able to
> link GEL into your proprietary program without ``infecting'' those
> programs.  GEL will not be a GPL program.

Sorry, I must have missed that crucial piece of information first time
around. I apologize for having spread that mistaken impression.

Now you have established how GEL will *NOT* be licensed, how *will* it be
licensed? I have received numerous corrections to my error, but no two of
them seemed to agree exactly on what would be licensed how. So, could you
explain once more which license will be used for:

 - GEL
 - Those x -> GEL translators written by the FSF (of course they won't have
   control over third party translators).

Thank you very much
Matthias

-----
Matthias Neeracher <neeri@iis.ee.ethz.ch> http://err.ethz.ch/members/neeri.html
  "... Rice walked out wondering if the world was nothing but wimps,
   pimps, psychos and sex fiends" -- James Ellroy, _Suicide Hill_