[clisp-list] Re: License Question in re FFI

[Kenny T. <kt...@ny...>]

Sam Steingold wrote:

>>* Kenny Tilton <xg...@al....pbz> [2005-06-08 14:47:01 -0400]:
>>
>> From the CLisp copyright:
>>
>>"This copyright does *not* cover user programs that run in CLISP and
>>  third-party packages not part of CLISP, if they only reference external
>>  symbols in CLISP's public packages (namely the packages COMMON-LISP,
>>  COMMON-LISP-USER, KEYWORD, EXT), i.e. if they don't rely on CLISP
>>  internals and would as well run in any other Common Lisp implementation."
>>
>>Hmmm. FFIs are not standardized. (Aside: CLisp's happens to rock big
>>time.) But if I use the FFI, which is not listed as one of the
>>"public" packages, my code also will not run in any other CL.
>>
>>Is my app now a derived work?
>>    
>>
>
>it is my understanding that portability layers are explicitly exempt
>from the GPL contagion.
>
Encouraging.

>
>The rule of thumb is: is your application useful without CLISP?
>(i.e., can it be used with other lisps?)
>if not, it's GPL.
>if yes, it's not.
>
But this is less encouraging: if the code uses CLisp FFI explicitly, it 
is not useful without CLisp. But only in a trivial sense,  because I 
just need to conditionalize the FFI stuff. But triviality may not help 
legally.

So, thanks, but I am still hearing conflicting answers. Hopefully Bruno 
can clear this up.

Thanks for responding.

kenny