Somewhat on topic - I thought this might be relevant - The most recent 
episode of the Free as in Freedom Podcast/Oggcast is entirely about 
Copyleft and the basics of compatibility. You can check out the episode 
here: 
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2011/feb/15/free-freedom-episode-0x09-copyleft-or-later-and-ba/

cheers!

-nruest

On 11-02-17 02:48 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> On 2/17/2011 12:50 PM, Eric Hellman wrote:
>> If list members would like to "name and shame" GPL incompatible 
>> interfaces that they're stuck working with, have at it. If I'm 
>> mistaken and there are none left, then I'd like to know it.
>
> Well, the problem with "viral" licenses like GPL is that other 
> licenses are essentially incompatible with them _unless_ they are open 
> source -- at least if you want to share the product of your 
> combination of those two libraries.
>
> You can't combine non-open-source code and GPL code in a single project.
>
> Personally, I much prefer "non-viral" type open source licenses like 
> Apache or MIT for this reason. The GPL advocates argue that viral-type 
> licenses like GPL are "more free" because nobody can take GPL code and 
> turn it into a proprietary product.  I see what they're trying to do. 
> But from my perspective 'non-viral' open source licenses like Apache 
> are 'more free' because it gives the user the freedom to combine 
> Apache code with non-open-source code in a project. You can't do that 
> with GPL, which seems less free to me.
>
> Jonathan