CMM support (Was: Re: [Openicc] google SoC starts)

[Graeme Gill]

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> You are making things much more difficult than they need to be. 

Not me, that's how the GPL licence is.

 > If a
> GPL'ed package has an option to use CMS, then a CMS package with freely 
> redistributable (with modifications allowed) source can be provided 
> along with the package if the package needs a CMS to run. Or the user 
> can be instructed to download one of CMS packages A (GPL licenced), B 
> (MIT licensed), or C (Adobe product), whichever she prefers and install 
> it for use with her GPLed package.  GPL places no limits on *use* of 
> binary software other than for redistribution. GPL programs are allowed 
> to use non-GPL'ed source packages as long as their redistribution terms 
> meet certain requirements.

And I've never indicated anything to the contrary. My previous
comments were all about distribution (ie. copying).

> In the case of your closed source bash script with bash, it is clear 
> that since bash uses the GPL license, its source must be distributed as 
> per GPL regardless.

Sorry, your sentence is unclear. "its" is referring to which
item, the closed source bash script, or bash ?

Graeme Gill.