Re: [Swig-dev] Re: [swig#] Re: [Introspector-swigsharp] Re: AW: SWIG Csharp module

[David B. <be...@cs...>]

James Michael DuPont writes:

 > > Also, is the lack of a GPL license on SWIG really a problem?  I don't
 > > want to change the current license and don't see why this is an issue
 > > (there's no restriction on the SWIG license that prevents it from
 > > being used as part of another project).
 > 
 > The GPL is not a problem. I am not a lawyer, and when requesting the
 > project, i did not know if your license was BSD or not, I do know that
 > it looked like it could be converted to GPL, so I did.
 > 
 > I would like to have a disjuct GPL, all of the modules that I want to
 > link to the introspector should be GPL, but I dont have a problem in
 > licensing the changes back to you under your license. That would be the
 > best of both worlds.
 > 
 > At least we can choose to link it into the gcc on the GPL and others
 > can use it under BSD as well.

Okay.  My primary concern is that I don't want SWIG to branch into a
non-GPL and a GPL version.  Incorporating GPL code back into SWIG is
also an issue due to the BSD-style licensing.  However, I'm not a
lawyer either so this isn't my area of speciality.  Mostly, I just
want to do whatever requires the least effort ;-).

 > If you want to give use CVS access and a place to put these changes,
 > then we dont need to do any extra work. I have now a subproject on
 > sourceforge, and a specific site on savannah. It would not be bad to
 > keep the savannah site so that the DOTGNU specific changes could be
 > hosted.
 > 

Let me try to find out what's going on with the SWIG C# module(s).
I've been a little disorganized with teaching lately and there seem to
be several different versions of this module floating around.  Maybe
the guilty parties can jump in here and give an update.

Cheers,

Dave