>>> Nigel >>>
This answer indicates that the courts have the defining say but that the spirit of the GPL is "that nontrivial dynamic linking creates a combined (i.e. derivative) work". This is why I believe that, without a specific exemption granted by you, a program that non-trivially depends on newlisp should be GPL'ed if distributed.
>>>
Yes, and that is pretty much how I see it too. People who want to distribute their software containng newlisp.exe or newlisp.dll should contact me to get permission.
Is permission per software-title or per developer?
How to contact you? Here or special mail-address?
Has the permission a price?
regarding:
People who want to distribute their software containng newlisp.exe or newlisp.dll should contact me to get permission.
I think that would only apply if newlisp was the only lisp that a program could work with.
If newlisp was included as an option for use in making a plug-in say but not absolutely required
it could be included. Or if another lisp could be used instead that is if the need wasn't absolute (I think).
Nigel
Licensing would be per title and per distributor, I can be contacted at: lutz@nuevatec.com with the word 'newlisp' or 'consulting' in the subject line of the email. The keyword is important , not to get eaten by my spam filters.