[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: hakyll-0.1

[Matthew Brecknell]

Tom Tobin wrote:
> I'm thinking something along these lines:
> 
> The background situation: X is a library distributed under the GPL.  Y
> is another library that uses that library and requires it in order to
> compile and function.
> 
> 1) Is there any scenario where Y can be distributed under a non-GPL
> license (e.g., the BSD)?
> 
> 2) If so, what would Y's author need to do (or *not* do)?
> 
> 3) If Y must be released under the GPL under the above scenario, and
> someone subsequently wrote library Z, an API compatible replacement
> for X, and released it under the BSD license, would Y's author now be
> permitted to release Y under the BSD?
> 
> (Feel free to add more questions, and/or suggest tweaks.)

Based on the discussion so far, I think you need to distinguish between
distributing source and distributing binaries. For example:

Background: X is a library distributed under GPL. Y is another library
which calls external functions in the API of X. Assume X and Y have
different authors.

1. Can the author of Y legally distribute the *source* of Y under a
non-GPL licence (BSD3, Modified BSD, etc), assuming such source is
distributed without any binaries, and is distributed separately from X?

2. etc.

Question 1 covers the situation at hand, and keeps the initial line of
questioning simple and specific.