🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <SJA.89Dec20185917@sirius.hut.fi> sja@sirius.hut.fi (Sakari Jalovaara) writes:
: Do programs that use, say, libg++-specific constructs not available in
: other C++ libraries, fall under the GPL even if distributed without
: any material covered by the GPL?  How about perl scripts?

Perl scripts are absolutely NOT covered by the GPL.  You own any that you
write, and can do with them what you please.  Only the perl source code
is under the GPL.  And I'm not too worried about someone cloning the
"look and feel" of perl.  Who'd want to?  If you get in trouble for cloning
someone's perl SCRIPT, that's between you and them.  Keep me out of it.

Yes, I supply some scripts within the perl package.  But you'll notice
they're in a subdirectory called "eg".  They're meant to be emulated,
and the README file in that directory says so explicitly.

I'm not picky about that sort of stuff.  Scripts are at the noise level.

Further, since I own the copyright on perl, I can give you a piece of
perl source code with a different copyright if I so choose, so it is not
out of the question that a piece of perl source code could end up in
a proprietary product if someone asked nicely and I wasn't feeling cross
that day.

If I had the slightest doubts about the GPL restricting the use of the perl
language, I wouldn't have put perl under it.  And if you have doubts
about my intentions to make perl as useful as possible, you don't know me.

Larry Wall
lwall@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov